From: Matthew DeVore <matvore@comcast.net>
Date: Wed, 29 May 2019 23:27:46 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 3/5] list-objects-filter: implement composite filters
Message-ID: <20190529232746.GE4700@comcast.net>
In-Reply-To: <9f1025ec-a3d7-c5f4-4a7a-15e4131f2b87@jeffhostetler.com>

On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 05:29:14PM -0400, Jeff Hostetler wrote:
> Was sparse:path filter the only reason for needing all the URL encoding?
> The sparse:oid form allows values <ref>:<path> and these (or at least
> the <path> portion) may contain special characters.  So don't we need to
> URL encode this form too?

Oh, I missed this. I was only thinking an oid was allowed after "sparse:". So as
I suspected I was overlooking something obvious.

Now I just want to understand the objection to URL encoding a little better. I
haven't worked with in a project that requires a lot of boilerplate before, so I
may be asking obvious things again. If so, sorry in advance.

So the objections, as I interpret them so far, are that:

 a the URL encoding/decoding complicates the code base
 b explaining the URL encoding, while it allows for future expansion, requires
   some verbose documentation in git-rev-list that is potentially distracting or
   confusing
 c there may be a better way to allow for future expansion that does not require
   URL encoding
 d the URL encoding is unpleasant to use (note that my patchset makes it
   optional for the user to use and it is only mandatory in sending it over the
   wire)

I think these are reasonable and I'm willing to stop digging my heels in :) Does
the above sum everything up?