Re: [PATCH 1/5] refs.c: allow passing raw git_committer_info as email to _update_reflog
- From
Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>
- Date
- Jul 25, 2014, 19:37 UTC
- Message-ID
- <20140725193728.GG12427@google.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <1406307521-10339-2-git-send-email-sahlberg@google.com>
Ronnie Sahlberg wrote:
> Add a new flag REFLOG_EMAIL_IS_COMMITTER to _update_reflog to tell it > that what we pass in as email is already the fully baked committer string > we can use as-is.
With and without the new flag, the 'email' argument has two different meanings:
* with the new flag, it should be an ident string, like 'Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com> 1406251347 -0700'
* without it, it should be the name-part of an ident string, like 'Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>
In neither case is it an email address. This seems unnecessarily confusing.
Is the caller responsible for checking the argument for validity? Do callers do so? Is this performance-critical or could the transaction_update_reflog function do a sanity-check?
[...]
Show 13 quoted lines
> /* > * Append a reflog entry for refname. If the REFLOG_TRUNCATE flag is set > * this update will first truncate the reflog before writing the entry. > * If msg is NULL no update will be written to the log. > */ > int transaction_update_reflog(struct ref_transaction *transaction, > const char *refname, > const unsigned char *new_sha1, > const unsigned char *old_sha1, > const char *email, > unsigned long timestamp, int tz, > const char *msg, int flags, > struct strbuf *err);
This is a lot of parameters, some optional, not all documented. Would it make sense to pack some into a struct?
Thanks and hope that helps, Jonathan