From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pb-smtp21.pobox.com (pb-smtp21.pobox.com [173.228.157.53]) (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 481351BED74 for ; Tue, 30 Apr 2024 22:23:12 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=173.228.157.53 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1714515794; cv=none; b=QsK3uDejLvIwby0z8TFgwA8MM0vgEH5971wXiGrns9+X6Dm0f71W2H4wSAwVa3deOEyWuQG90cbPJUQSxPrPmGj+zdNNq33Tf5EmoD8hdSpQGwVLo5S2QPZBUkiSPE6SgObljPm5B7qQI5EwwUyx+PO22ax3IzDz96s8q9I/0is= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1714515794; c=relaxed/simple; bh=/Mez6wgvCqsa1Meiy8TBs1WsB2QyIfMp1LTo3rwXv9E=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=PliZleE7nyqetuuUGEUAsI7DSYDRT/ThD44tWOC8cXX0YyeByWwWYxy9JB8XQhqb7Zf9HjVCrKzf5M3QYhiy6z0zW12lh68ZOOfye0GKF9eyg9h89S7oU0XN2cun6JuI81f48gitIYzzwq4tPwQ22+Fx7A+8t7ijq8QM43W36KA= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=pobox.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pobox.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b=gv/z6ZFv; arc=none smtp.client-ip=173.228.157.53 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=pobox.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pobox.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b="gv/z6ZFv" Received: from pb-smtp21.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A85122A49; Tue, 30 Apr 2024 18:23:12 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=/Mez6wgvCqsa1Meiy8TBs1WsB2QyIfMp1LTo3r wXv9E=; b=gv/z6ZFvxw2+CJKw8YNwge43SMv0XB1yX+09LITYxqmsIpaivJN721 Gy8NdsYsKn0p1vAbiqlxOAio094kX5VCxHDJxlJjSKvyGOk22mxHdaA/atSsbbkl uG+x4HqJRrV1EOCkjO2Nf/8OP+CDONdeh8PrQaeUmdXMgijoWnkw8= Received: from pb-smtp21.sea.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 834F322A48; Tue, 30 Apr 2024 18:23:12 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.125.120.109]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7EE6B22A47; Tue, 30 Apr 2024 18:23:07 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: John Passaro Cc: John Passaro via GitGitGadget , git@vger.kernel.org, Patrick Steinhardt Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/3] builtin/tag.c: add --trailer arg In-Reply-To: (John Passaro's message of "Tue, 30 Apr 2024 17:48:14 -0400") References: <5b6239167b8d7c26f96e5c23d0d82b7a3a9b01fe.1714416865.git.gitgitgadget@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2024 15:23:05 -0700 Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 3848BFAA-0740-11EF-9BD0-A19503B9AAD1-77302942!pb-smtp21.pobox.com John Passaro writes: > There's also project-specific trailers. For example, on my team, > we use "Deploy-Strategy: ..." to tell CICD what deployment routines to run. This > is pretty specific to us but worth calling out. Maybe could translate to a > documentation example with something like ": foo" The last one that uses placeholders for both trailer tag and value may be generic enough. > However, in service of helping users find workarounds, shouldn't we tell them > --trailer may be the culprit? > >> Failed to read '%s'. Try again without --trailer (use -e or -F to add trailers manually). I dunno. If -m/-F that wrote the original using the open/write_or_die/close sequence succeeded, the "amend_file" thing successfully spawned "interpret-trailers --in-place" and got control back, yet we fail to read that message back, it does not smell like a failure with that "--trailer" option to me. A failure with "--trailer" that could be worked around would have been caught in "amend_file" thing, before the control reaches this point, no?