Re: [PATCH] tag: do not show ambiguous tag names as "tags/foo"
- From
Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
- Date
- Jan 24, 2016, 07:18 UTC
- Message-ID
- <20160124071815.GB24084@sigill.intra.peff.net>
- In-Reply-To
- <20160124071234.GA24084@sigill.intra.peff.net>
On Sun, Jan 24, 2016 at 02:12:35AM -0500, Jeff King wrote:
Show 19 quoted lines
> In theory, the ref-filter code could figure this out by us > passing FILTER_REFS_TAGS. But there are two complications > there: > > 1. The handling of refname:short is deep in formatting > code that does not even have our ref_filter struct, let > alone the arguments to the filter_ref struct. > > 2. In git v2.7.0, we expose the formatting language to the > user. If we follow this path, it will mean that > "%(refname:short)" behaves differently for "tag" versus > "for-each-ref" (including "for-each-ref refs/tags/"), > which can lead to confusion. > > Instead, let's extend the "short" modifier in the formatting > language to handle a specific prefix. This fixes "git tag", > and lets users invoke the same behavior from their own > custom formats (for "tag" or "for-each-ref") while leaving > ":short" with its same consistent meaning in all places.
I think the patch I posted is a reasonable way to go. But I also don't think that having "%(refname:short)" behave specially for "git-tag" is all that unreasonable, either. But I'm open to argument.
Here are a few more considerations I had.
- I'm not sure if the "special" behavior works as well for git-branch, which may want to shorten both "refs/heads/" and "refs/remotes/", depending on the type of ref.
My solution may not extend there naturally, either, depending on how it is implemented.
- To let users get the same behavior out of for-each-ref, we could perhaps auto-infer that looking at "refs/tags/" means shortening and disambiguation should only happen with respect to the "refs/tags/" hierarchy.
But I'm uncomfortable changing the meaning of ":short" without at least a new option. And what would it mean for "git for-each-ref refs/heads/foo/"? Would it shorten "refs/heads/foo/bar" to just "bar", or would it still be "foo/bar"?
-Peff