Re: git notes: notes

From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Date: Jan 20, 2010, 21:36 UTC
Message-ID: <20100120213631.GB9107@coredump.intra.peff.net>
In-Reply-To: <7veilk1o3s.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>

On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 01:08:07PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:

Show 9 quoted lines

> > No, but outputting the note as part of the log is the standard. So for
> > example, when you do a format-patch | apply cycle, format-patch will
> > insert the note as part of the commit message, and apply will *store*
> > the note text (including Note:\n) as part of the commit message of the
> > new commit.
> 
> Thanks; that was the kind of breakage report I was looking for (and wished
> to have heard a lot earlier).  Personally I find it is unexcusable that
> format-patch defaults to giving notes.

I agree. I noticed this while doing the "don't show in raw" feature elsewhere in the thread and wanted to ask: which formats _should_ have notes by default?

To be honest, I am not sure _any_ format should have it by default. If I am running "git log" and my notes are filled with random automatically generated bisection cruft, I don't want to see that cluttering my output. Yes, all of our test notes are human-written annotations, but I think we really don't know yet what sorts of things people will be putting in them.

Long ago I proposed a set of notes namespaces to deal with this (so automatic bisection cruft would go into its own notes namespace, and human-readable ones would be in some default namespace), but I don't know how much of that idea (if any) survived into the current implementation.

Show 5 quoted lines

> > I'm not complaining, I actually have this on a maybe-to-do list, but the
> > way the series went kept me from investing time.
> 
> Hmm, that hints there is a failure in the review and merge process.  Care
> to explain how we could have done better please?

Personally, I stopped paying attention simply because it was gigantic and I am not all that interested in using the feature personally.

-Peff