From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.0 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI, RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 481831F667 for ; Fri, 18 Aug 2017 07:45:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751055AbdHRHpm (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Aug 2017 03:45:42 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com ([64.147.108.71]:62239 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751027AbdHRHpk (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Aug 2017 03:45:40 -0400 Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE1229D74C; Fri, 18 Aug 2017 03:45:34 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=74PeDvawpQu8qCkJgZfiohV9ynI=; b=dFFdyI jPd5T6R/TcwNF+8oAwJPuX0jFDIqHhwhAjV8SXMjb1mHmgJxQgp505FLlbaKiO1b 5dgSK+IAJHSnc4QvvHXxSnLpVDTM1Kikdg1d+/0tEp7LNQmi768be5QGYS3xHeAc 5y4GNhpgzHJGG5ZTjgaR4iCHWGCrdA4u/ivcE= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=PtXjiN6iuV19p4pim29zYPavKVlhcavn jvdTTaXmJi88o3gifi56x7gjjPxy57KypfO0y4qcgxQPeLKjGlIz78UGnqYd+IwB /kAxro//ycpQaBYPU4+xR/66NjTcoisqGK8lLby0TkzkBZ3URhd9E5J1ZTPivDru p3/vywIZfCw= Received: from pb-smtp2.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A58A39D74B; Fri, 18 Aug 2017 03:45:34 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [104.132.0.95]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0E3F39D74A; Fri, 18 Aug 2017 03:45:33 -0400 (EDT) From: Junio C Hamano To: Jeff King Cc: Jonathan Nieder , Marko Kungla , git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] check-ref-format: require a repository for --branch References: <20170714180313.apsnbnw7no2nvtf5@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20170714181831.fvi2coppzhm747mk@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20170717172709.GL93855@aiede.mtv.corp.google.com> <20170817102217.3yw7uxnkupdy3lh5@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20170818062021.gqhsose5kepth55h@sigill.intra.peff.net> Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2017 00:45:32 -0700 In-Reply-To: <20170818062021.gqhsose5kepth55h@sigill.intra.peff.net> (Jeff King's message of "Fri, 18 Aug 2017 02:20:22 -0400") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 378D498C-83E9-11E7-8FD9-9D2B0D78B957-77302942!pb-smtp2.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Jeff King writes: > I _do_ think it's a misfeature to put it in check-ref-format. It should > be part of rev-parse. Which admittedly is a kitchen sink, but this kind > of resolving is one of the main things it should be doing. And in fact > you can already do: > > git rev-parse --symbolic-full-name @{-1} > > But I stopped short of suggesting we remove the feature entirely. It > would obviously require a deprecation period. Yeah, I realize that "nonsense" was a bit too strong. I do agree that it was a misfeature to place in "check" ref-format, though. Thanks.