From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (lindbergh.monkeyblade.net [23.128.96.19]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A960C30CFC for ; Tue, 7 Nov 2023 19:30:24 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=github.com header.i=@github.com header.b="c7RqnziB" Received: from mail-pl1-x62b.google.com (mail-pl1-x62b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::62b]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 42619AF for ; Tue, 7 Nov 2023 11:30:24 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-pl1-x62b.google.com with SMTP id d9443c01a7336-1cc131e52f1so231515ad.0 for ; Tue, 07 Nov 2023 11:30:24 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=google; t=1699385424; x=1699990224; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:references:cc:to :content-language:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=bYSS5EVqAnTf4pT6dcLPPEa0Y3H+P6g/HNg6oao8Oqg=; b=c7RqnziBdkJOh1fXy4ehFjmx2crKgdA5nBVE3LT9eE+mmxCUr7YX0sFvJbh8D0XaOk MVJW/nrPrFOlspv8ecT9pSigTTgt6rIU1qXTl8MeDI5bKXCRfVo3oR05BOQ8ajvq6BUg F0pCfQudCw/8kAQUQ4dHdhyTJ7iPMh0RM3azNh/VvKu09hgM2Okm0TEm+H4TlGwKlkZR BaUjVZRa1t8B1dDwnlNLhwFv4bXlW5INyRjpk/EwDxofsTxWNQO4VM9cYe3ZtjmiSLiD CMOCe1vuB6j35WlRtMJVSfFG1MmigZ27Q63aIgjd0b0uAugriiEABZqDRvlUDB1MuhGM KCLQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1699385424; x=1699990224; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:references:cc:to :content-language:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=bYSS5EVqAnTf4pT6dcLPPEa0Y3H+P6g/HNg6oao8Oqg=; b=MV9p2ge9Wuxpyu6i5yJSkDbZq5/R9LRDVD9y478luFg72R/ZJrbxJYTJwYda1SPTGB ogQWle+Ok4mPvF+CQv9BNVk4Hb69hiVn07C5oIM6SEmE7lk2P3RHzuS2fbJMW7pTYJlS qKE9ssmbpyJBTB8W3xHyE0GWOSYxo1ZdhPxT1L7JAxx85AYRzkwFj7DC4temBLCte6by LNx9y/pr+Z2EhiavOKMihuB7O/UZgEkSesn3TpG359RLBliNRW7qqMXBF/NRr8eE8Ck2 himbZwB+1Xm2tX9JF17vAvKu9VxXEi8fBguME6BC9Pe8HLhMS7jHKSfvDkGxUNNWPndf N5ZA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yw5nqwRPKavTL1w31+AIfDn33TCp5UM311N0JKGmwcgVDdlTmRF RWyOanU9RQSu0BBeTH7qRpZmKhJbdRrHWVnUYw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IHJ01HVR4imBZNKA+RXSA3PadU6e/pox50wXxpwEvoCkV65KSv+9fZIDh0aZRq1s7gv8YFTXQ== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:ce88:b0:1cc:332f:9e4b with SMTP id f8-20020a170902ce8800b001cc332f9e4bmr5767449plg.1.1699385423737; Tue, 07 Nov 2023 11:30:23 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.50.41] (cpe-172-91-184-234.socal.res.rr.com. [172.91.184.234]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id jn14-20020a170903050e00b001c74718f2f3sm180079plb.119.2023.11.07.11.30.22 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 07 Nov 2023 11:30:23 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Tue, 7 Nov 2023 11:30:22 -0800 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/9] for-each-ref: clarify interaction of --omit-empty & --count Content-Language: en-US To: =?UTF-8?Q?=C3=98ystein_Walle?= , gitgitgadget@gmail.com Cc: git@vger.kernel.org References: <88eba4146cd250fcabfb9ffa9b410ce912a82ce7.1699320362.git.gitgitgadget@gmail.com> <20231107192326.48296-1-oystwa@gmail.com> From: Victoria Dye In-Reply-To: <20231107192326.48296-1-oystwa@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Øystein Walle wrote: > Hi Victoria, > > Victoria Dye writes: > >> Update the 'for-each-ref' builtin documentation to clarify that refs >> "omitted" by --omit-empty are still counted toward the limit specified >> by --count. The use of the term "omit" would otherwise be somewhat >> ambiguous and could incorrectly be construed as excluding empty refs >> entirely (i.e. not counting them towards the total ref count). > > I implemented --omit-empty and I completely overlooked --count! > > (If I were to do it all over again I probably would have implemented it > so that so-called omitted refs did not count towards the total. It makes > sense to me since e.g. `git log -3 -- git.c` prints the three most > recent commits that touch git.c regardless of how many commits were > walked in the process.) Since the interaction isn't clearly defined at the moment, we could probably still update it to work like you're describing here. I'm happy to drop this patch and implement your recommendation in a follow-up series. Let me know what you think! > > This is a good and welcome clarification. > > Acked-by: Øystein Walle