Re: [PATCH] for-each-ref: add split message parts to %(contents:*).
- From
Michał Górny <mgorny@gentoo.org>
- Date
- Sep 1, 2011, 16:48 UTC
- Message-ID
- <20110901184815.2cd8b472@pomiocik.lan>
- In-Reply-To
- <20110901162222.GC15018@sigill.intra.peff.net>
On Thu, 1 Sep 2011 12:22:22 -0400 Jeff King <peff@peff.net> wrote:
Show 21 quoted lines
> On Thu, Sep 01, 2011 at 09:00:39AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > > >> > To match the parsing of commit objects, I would prefer to see > > >> > "subject" to mean "the first paragraph" (usually the first line > > >> > alone but that is purely from convention), but that probably > > >> > is a separate topic. > > >> > > >> Good idea. I suspect pretty.c:format_subject can be reused here. > > > > > > Should I fix regular 'subject' and 'body' as well, or just > > > the 'contents:' variants? > > > > I thought you made them synonyms... > > No, %(body) retains its historical usage as body+signature. If you > think it's OK to change that. > > We could either leave %(subject) with its historical behavior, or fix > it to handle multi-line subjects. Although it's technically a > regression to change it, I tend to think it is simply a bug, as it > doesn't match what the rest of git (like "git log --format=%s") does.
Ok, I'll go with fixing it. If we want to have old behavior back, it's as simple as putting the line copying function in the right place.
Sadly, I had to add a few magical '-1's and '+1's to get whitespace in-place. It seems that signed, unannotated signatures glue to subject.
-- Best regards, Michał Górny