Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] format-patch: teach format.notes config option
- From
Denton Liu <liu.denton@gmail.com>
- Date
- May 14, 2019, 17:01 UTC
- Message-ID
- <20190514170107.GA4151@archbookpro.localdomain>
- In-Reply-To
- <xmqqimufdqey.fsf@gitster-ct.c.googlers.com>
Hi Junio,
On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 11:44:21AM +0900, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Show 27 quoted lines
> Denton Liu <liu.denton@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > @@ -864,6 +866,20 @@ static int git_format_config(const char *var, const char *value, void *cb)
> > from = NULL;
> > return 0;
> > }
> > + if (!strcmp(var, "format.notes")) {
> > + struct strbuf buf = STRBUF_INIT;
> > +
> > + rev->show_notes = 1;
> > + if (!strcmp(value, "standard")) {
> > + rev->notes_opt.use_default_notes = 1;
> > + } else {
> > + strbuf_addstr(&buf, value);
> > + expand_notes_ref(&buf);
> > + string_list_append(&rev->notes_opt.extra_notes_refs,
> > + strbuf_detach(&buf, NULL));
> > + }
> > + return 0;
> > + }
>
> Unlike the command line option parser, this does not seem to touch
> rev->show_notes_given at all. Intended? I am wondering how well
> this implementation meshes with what 66b2ed09 ("Fix "log" family not
> to be too agressive about showing notes", 2010-01-20) wanted to do,
> which 894a9d33 ("Support showing notes from more than one notes
> tree", 2010-03-12) later extended.This was intended but I'm not 100% sure that it's correct.
From what I could gleam from reading the code, `show_notes_given` is only used by the `cmd_log_init` function, which is not called by format-patch. As a result, I opted to not set that flag since it's not really "given" in the sense that a user didn't explicitly pass in a command-line option indicating they wanted notes.
Show 23 quoted lines
> > > +test_expect_success 'format-patch notes output control' ' > > + git notes add -m "notes config message" HEAD && > > + test_when_finished git notes remove HEAD && > > + > > + git format-patch -1 --stdout >out && > > + ! grep "notes config message" out && > > + git format-patch -1 --stdout --notes >out && > > + grep "notes config message" out && > > + git format-patch -1 --stdout --no-notes >out && > > + ! grep "notes config message" out && > > + git format-patch -1 --stdout --notes --no-notes >out && > > + ! grep "notes config message" out && > > + git format-patch -1 --stdout --no-notes --notes >out && > > + grep "notes config message" out && > > + > > + test_config format.notes standard && > > I think we tend to spell these things "default". > > Alternatively, the format.notes configuration can be "bool or text", > and make the variable set to 'true' mean "show notes, using the > default ref".
I think I'l go with this approach.
Show 26 quoted lines
> > > + git format-patch -1 --stdout >out && > > + grep "notes config message" out && > > + git format-patch -1 --stdout --notes >out && > > + grep "notes config message" out && > > + git format-patch -1 --stdout --no-notes >out && > > + ! grep "notes config message" out && > > + git format-patch -1 --stdout --notes --no-notes >out && > > + ! grep "notes config message" out && > > + git format-patch -1 --stdout --no-notes --notes >out && > > + grep "notes config message" out > > +' > > OK. > > > +test_expect_success 'format-patch with multiple notes refs' ' > > + git notes --ref note1 add -m "this is note 1" HEAD && > > + test_when_finished git notes --ref note1 remove HEAD && > > + git notes --ref note2 add -m "this is note 2" HEAD && > > + test_when_finished git notes --ref note2 remove HEAD && > > + ... > > + git format-patch -1 --stdout --notes=note1 --notes=note2 >out && > > + grep "this is note 1" out && > > + grep "this is note 2" out && > > Do we promise the order in which these two lines appear in the output?
According to the code, the order is stable. However, I just read through the documentation and I realised that the ablility to provide multiple notes refs is undocumented.
In a future reroll, I'll document the fact that --notes can be provided multiple times.
Show 27 quoted lines
> > > + test_config format.notes note1 && > > + git format-patch -1 --stdout >out && > > + grep "this is note 1" out && > > + ! grep "this is note 2" out && > > + git format-patch -1 --stdout --no-notes >out && > > + ! grep "this is note 1" out && > > + ! grep "this is note 2" out && > > + git format-patch -1 --stdout --notes=note2 >out && > > + grep "this is note 1" out && > > + grep "this is note 2" out && > > So format.notes say note1 but the command line explicitly asks it > wants note from note2, but the command still gives from note1 > anyway. > > > + git format-patch -1 --stdout --no-notes --notes=note2 >out && > > + ! grep "this is note 1" out && > > + grep "this is note 2" out && > > And there is a way to work it around, i.e. clear everything > configured with --no-notes and then name the one you want from the > command line. > > I am not sure if the above is consistent with how our options and > configurations interact in general. Shouldn't the --notes=note2 > alone in the earlier example cancel format.notes=note1 configured?
I borrowed this behaviour from how format.to behaves. In format-patch, `--to` gives a recipient that is used _in addition_ to any format.to variables. `--no-to` can override this. I made format.notes behave similarly.
Show 13 quoted lines
> > > + git config --add format.notes note2 && > > + git format-patch -1 --stdout >out && > > + grep "this is note 1" out && > > + grep "this is note 2" out && > > + git format-patch -1 --stdout --no-notes >out && > > + ! grep "this is note 1" out && > > + ! grep "this is note 2" out > > +' > > + > > echo "fatal: --name-only does not make sense" > expect.name-only > > echo "fatal: --name-status does not make sense" > expect.name-status > > echo "fatal: --check does not make sense" > expect.check