Re: Git for Windows v2.23.0-rc0, was Re: [ANNOUNCE] Git v2.23.0-rc0
- From
Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
- Date
- Aug 1, 2019, 21:36 UTC
- Message-ID
- <20190801213638.GA30522@sigill.intra.peff.net>
- In-Reply-To
- <xmqqlfwcopn1.fsf@gitster-ct.c.googlers.com>
On Thu, Aug 01, 2019 at 08:45:54AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Show 9 quoted lines
> While I think "revert to hardcoded default" may be a good idea, I do > not think the hardcoded default you implemented that changes the > behaviour based on the output destination makes much sense. If I > want to eradicate junkio@cox.net from my paged/interactive output, I > want to eradicate it also in the output piped to the script I use > for authorship stats. > > I suspect that you may have misread the "is interactive" bit in the > original; that was used only to decide if we are going to warn.
Yeah, I wondered about the same misreading when I read the response in:
https://public-inbox.org/git/20190801011448.GB176307@google.com/
> Anyway, how about this much simplified version?
Yes, this is what I was thinking of in my earlier responses, but...
Show 11 quoted lines
> @@ -214,12 +204,8 @@ static void cmd_log_init_finish(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix,
> memset(&w, 0, sizeof(w));
> userformat_find_requirements(NULL, &w);
>
> - if (mailmap < 0) {
> - if (session_is_interactive() && !rev->pretty_given)
> - warning("%s\n", _(warn_unspecified_mailmap_msg));
> -
> + if (mailmap < 0)
> mailmap = 0;
> - }This should be "mailmap = 1" to match the commit message, no? (Which also implies we may want a new test).
I'd also be OK with leaving it at "0" for now, making a note of the upcoming change in the release notes, and flipping it _next_ time. But IMHO we don't need to be that conservative (and I share your pessimism that enough people actually read the release notes to merit that kind of advance notice).
-Peff