Re: [PATCH 3/3] tag: support configuring --sort via .gitconfig

> "Keller, Jacob E" <jacob.e.keller@intel.com> writes:
> 
> > On Mon, 2014-07-14 at 10:17 -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> >> Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:
> >> 
> >> > On Sun, Jul 13, 2014 at 01:33:56PM -0400, Jeff King wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> I realize that I am reinventing the error-reporting wheel on a sleepy
> >> >> Sunday afternoon without having thought about it much, so there is
> >> >> probably some gotcha or case that makes this ugly, or perhaps it just
> >> >> ends up verbose in practice. But one can dream.
> >> >
> >> > Just for fun...
> >> 
> >> Yes, that is fun.
> >> 
> >> I actually think your "In 'version:pefname' and 'wersion:refname',
> >> we want be able to report 'pefname' and 'wersion' are misspelled,
> >> and returning -1 or enum would not cut it" is a good argument.  The
> >> callee wants to have flexibility on _what_ to report, just as the
> >> caller wants to have flexibility on _how_.  In this particular code
> >> path, I think the former far outweighs the latter, and my suggestion
> >> I called "silly" might not be so silly but may have struck the right
> >> balance.  I dunno.
> >> 
> >> If you absolutely need to have both, you would need something like
> >> your approach, of course, but I am not sure if it is worth it.
> >> 
> >> I am not sure how well this meshes with i18n (I know the "for fun"
> >> does not even attempt to, but if we tried to, I suspect it may
> >> become even uglier).  We would also need to override both error and
> >> warning routines and have the reporter tag the errors in these two
> >> categories, no?
> >
> > Do we want to go this way?
> 
> I do not speak for Peff, but I personally think this is just a "fun"
> demonstration, nothing more, and my gut feeling is that it would
> make things unnecessary complex without much real gain to pursue it
> further.