Re: What's cooking in git.git (Feb 2024, #02; Fri, 2)

From: Phillip Wood <phillip.wood123@gmail.com>
Date: Feb 5, 2024, 18:57 UTC
Message-ID: <087d3438-98a1-46fe-89d9-8e7e1662151b@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <xmqqmssirm6t.fsf@gitster.g>

Hi Junio

On 03/02/2024 08:23, Junio C Hamano wrote:

Show 10 quoted lines

> * kn/for-all-refs (2024-01-29) 4 commits
>    (merged to 'next' on 2024-01-30 at e7a9234a8b)
>   + for-each-ref: avoid filtering on empty pattern
>   + refs: introduce `refs_for_each_all_refs()`
>   + refs: extract out `loose_fill_ref_dir_regular_file()`
>   + refs: introduce `is_pseudoref()` and `is_headref()`
> 
>   "git for-each-ref" filters its output with prefixes given from the
>   command line, but it did not honor an empty string to mean "pass
>   everything", which has been corrected.

I've been a bit slow to look at the latest re-roll but having done so I'm concerned that the UI could use some improvement. If I understand correctly the proposal is to make

	git for-each-ref

and

	git for-each-ref ""

behave differently so that the latter prints the pseudorefs from the current worktree and the former does not. I can't help feeling that's the sort of thing that makes people complain that git is hard to understand. I wonder if we'd be better off adding an option to include pseudorefs and have an empty pattern behave the same as no pattern.

Best Wishes

Phillip

>   Will merge to 'master'.
>   source: <20240129113527.607022-1-karthik.188@gmail.com>