Re: [PATCH v4 31/45] rebase: trivial cleanup
- From
Fredrik Gustafsson <iveqy@iveqy.com>
- Date
- Jun 11, 2013, 17:08 UTC
- Message-ID
- <20130611170815.GA20009@paksenarrion.iveqy.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <7vhah4d3sk.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
Thank you for your reply. Although I agree with everything you say, it raised a few more questions.
On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 09:12:59AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Incorrect. "git rebase" invokes "git am", not dot-sources it, so it > does not propagate.
Then git am wouldn't be quite and this patch is doing wrong by removing the -q argument from the git am invokation. Correct?
Show 5 quoted lines
> I think it is irrelevant. git-am uses many shell variables, > e.g. HAS_HEAD, interactive, abort_safety, etc. but they are > implementation details of the program and there is no point > documenting it, and somebody rewriting it in C does not have to > stick to the same name.
<--snip-->
> There are a few used as implementation details, I think. GIT_QUIET > is not among them.
I made a mistake here thinking that git rebase set an enviromental variable that git am later red. That would have been a way to communicate, that the first processes that got the -q argument sets the enviromental variabel GIT_QUIET and all other git invokations read that enviromental variable.
I do not like that solution. When communicating between different git commands I prefer, pipes, files and command line arguments. I think it will be dangerous to include temporary enviromental variables (if we don't stick to a few of them and document them very well).
In the case of passing information with temporary enviromental variables it's no longer an implementation detail, but something a rewrite needs to honor.
I hope I was able to make myself somewhat clear, and if I understand you correctly we are already agreeing on this?
-- Med vänliga hälsningar Fredrik Gustafsson tel: 0733-608274 e-post: iveqy@iveqy.com