From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from fhigh-b2-smtp.messagingengine.com (fhigh-b2-smtp.messagingengine.com [202.12.124.153]) (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 CA2542264C0 for ; Fri, 23 Jan 2026 17:01:47 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=202.12.124.153 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1769187709; cv=none; b=NY7i4vLRjBqbuDa7Ed90WRUnHd9qPemqQeK5tClsfNdpbSC5Pd9lOgMFREW5S4gjQNWsg6ruMxs73oxcjhG43YzHbKvdVvQgRLzzXvw6D0237HgPRpAlhNq8KsNgWPQYcaxp3+wEKsqQQZXsMsgR4nnSxZOkObInfyoytIvpxUs= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1769187709; c=relaxed/simple; bh=raIeBSjVw7/AzIXvUJxC3+aJph4DHxbWQppYvhj6zmU=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=abetJpdv1vtBO+ydR1brxQHhnM9nfyb5fCR207nOifHiGp7mBg3BPyZmE5Xs/1mtIflvlvtPT56q+TyuCJsFyxwV5ySAz37pcbDppZQ4CEFygCDxIvhevPjfzZzM04Nnc7kvhFdrdXdVUwrbIhBCxGoRVyQD3xPTo13QONQh9ZY= 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 (2048-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b=pgSzEtlc; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b=ArEvQxM3; arc=none smtp.client-ip=202.12.124.153 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 (2048-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b="pgSzEtlc"; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b="ArEvQxM3" Received: from phl-compute-06.internal (phl-compute-06.internal [10.202.2.46]) by mailfhigh.stl.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A41F7A0087; Fri, 23 Jan 2026 12:01:46 -0500 (EST) Received: from phl-frontend-02 ([10.202.2.161]) by phl-compute-06.internal (MEProxy); Fri, 23 Jan 2026 12:01:46 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=cc :cc:content-type:content-type:date:date:from:from:in-reply-to :in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject :subject:to:to; s=fm1; t=1769187706; x=1769274106; bh=iiSQqfQlGP Nfq9UfP2NG1OGBTTK9sIyJKVJ7ye6wzkI=; b=pgSzEtlcIAvcoEXIwR4Re2p5OY ObB8hIfbPqaHmCq/w9L5/Bg7v06Lyno5eS9AZ8pb+cCJBd2HzkC/iHcsbjB6sN7q urqMD9v5QGMULxXJdyxlBRgH+cr68R0HJbI9oDdPGicZzbC+lx/5FH/NKoV01ocR B1zmhcW6voyRNBtFxxYGShlq5hl0ix5hws/C+s07Vb0DU+4nDm1FpYIeGYJMP7cU VFGUlGlfr4Fsd51PF7dQeY88QqfEuNch+bJaoKGCN0OjqC3JBif2GpBrDGkq1yld WIPANg0iChMqbaFobGJZYtuaG2Hx1LuFH+UUO+MsXA4iZ4+C8dt7fmpOyeAw== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-type:content-type:date:date :feedback-id:feedback-id:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject:subject:to :to:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; t= 1769187706; x=1769274106; bh=iiSQqfQlGPNfq9UfP2NG1OGBTTK9sIyJKVJ 7ye6wzkI=; b=ArEvQxM3BWTrG2GdcH4LVW1LtLTRBL6qhISOOhBpXqEzfsGg4/x Hw73sFSN9cyGfcXd0LS4Zgh2lZsyIJ90DftNP+A2iYZFbQiyURN9TmvjbcE6Xm2U syzNstG3xwqyIoKWaSMh7ujdn+Liz6Sl37gcjloe2YdFW7bjTPwhPd/ZKGSHiFn0 wIyX0yMazu1h8bESbDuWypKubtINvzmY5KvBBDGzM8FOGXDltQ+/tGbCYGGl4x9U ut7kt9tsX+azoDe0SI6gjzg89EXNfCXlfReAzHkQ2cX/SDoOE6Agmnz6xgm3ML4R c2cmGcbq1dC3AMfiEED74POVWzCnFp0jPgA== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeefgedrtddtgddugeelheekucetufdoteggodetrf dotffvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgenuceu rghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmnecujf gurhephffvvefujghffffkfgggtgesthdtredttdertdenucfhrhhomheplfhunhhiohcu vecujfgrmhgrnhhouceoghhithhsthgvrhesphhosghogidrtghomheqnecuggftrfgrth htvghrnhepfeevteetjeehueegffelvdetieevffeufeejleeuffetiefggfeftdfhfeei geeinecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepgh hithhsthgvrhesphhosghogidrtghomhdpnhgspghrtghpthhtohephedpmhhouggvpehs mhhtphhouhhtpdhrtghpthhtohepthhoohhnsehiohhttghlrdgtohhmpdhrtghpthhtoh epghhithesvhhgvghrrdhkvghrnhgvlhdrohhrghdprhgtphhtthhopehpshesphhkshdr ihhmpdhrtghpthhtohepkhhrihhsthhofhhfvghrhhgruhhgshgsrghkkhesfhgrshhtmh grihhlrdgtohhmpdhrtghpthhtohepghhithhsthgvrhesphhosghogidrtghomh X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: if26b431b:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Fri, 23 Jan 2026 12:01:45 -0500 (EST) From: Junio C Hamano To: Toon Claes Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Patrick Steinhardt , Kristoffer Haugsbakk Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/4] last-modified: rewrite error message when more than one revision given In-Reply-To: <20260123-toon-last-modified-tree-v4-1-86bf97bad4e2@iotcl.com> (Toon Claes's message of "Fri, 23 Jan 2026 15:33:01 +0100") References: <20260123-toon-last-modified-tree-v4-0-86bf97bad4e2@iotcl.com> <20260123-toon-last-modified-tree-v4-1-86bf97bad4e2@iotcl.com> Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2026 09:01:44 -0800 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 Toon Claes writes: > When more than one revision is passed to the git-last-modified(1) > command, this error message was printed: > > error: last-modified can only operate on one tree at a time > > Calling these a "tree" is technically not correct. git-last-modified(1) > expects revisions that peel to a commit. > > Rephrase the error message to: > > error: last-modified can only operate on one revision at a time > > While at it, ensure modify the test to ensure the correct error message > is printed. "ensure modify" -> "modify". > if (num_interesting++) > - return error(_("last-modified can only operate on one tree at a time")); > + return error(_("last-modified can only operate on one revision at a time")); I recall we earlier had discussions on "commit" vs "revision", but was the conclusion that 'revision' is the appropriate term here? I somehow feel that it is sufficient to insist on "commit" (not "commit-ish"). The way you are allowed to give that commit might be more lenient and you may be able to pass a tag that points at a commit, but that does not change the fact that the "last-modified" command can only operate on one commit at a time, does it? > +test_expect_success 'cannot run last-modified on two revision' ' "two revision" -> "two revisions". > + test_must_fail git last-modified HEAD HEAD~1 2>err && > + test_grep "last-modified can only operate on one revision at a time" err > +' > + > test_expect_success 'last-modified complains about unknown arguments' ' > test_must_fail git last-modified --foo 2>err && > - grep "unknown last-modified argument: --foo" err > + test_grep "unknown last-modified argument: --foo" err > ' > > test_done