Re: What's cooking in git.git (Oct 2025, #08; Thu, 23)

From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Date: Oct 24, 2025, 15:47 UTC
Message-ID: <20251024154719.GA1779502@coredump.intra.peff.net>
In-Reply-To: <xmqqy0p1qjha.fsf@gitster.g>

On Thu, Oct 23, 2025 at 04:36:01PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:

Show 12 quoted lines

> * jc/diff-from-contents-fix (2025-10-22) 1 commit
>   (merged to 'next' on 2025-10-23 at fae07d2113)
>  + diff: make sure the other caller of diff_flush_patch_quietly() is silent
>  (this branch is used by ly/diff-name-only-with-diff-from-content; uses jk/diff-from-contents-fix.)
> 
>  The code to squelch output from "git diff -w --name-status"
>  etc. for paths that "git diff -w -p" would have stayed silent
>  leaked output from dry-run patch generation, which has been
>  corrected.
> 
>  Will merge to 'master'.
>  source: <xmqqy0p4wcac.fsf@gitster.g>

OK, looks like you picked up the fix from the last round of discussion. Good. Is this destined for 'maint'? My patch fixed the regression from v2.51.1 with "--quiet", but I think there is still one for "-w --raw", etc. And so our choices are:

  1. Take jc/diff-from-contents-fix to maint to fix that.

  2. Take ly/diff-name-only-with-diff-from-content to maint to fix that.

  3. Let that bug remain until those topics hit 'master'.

As I said earlier, I had at first thought that the bug there was just an incomplete fix, but it really is a regression (extra garbled output). I'm OK if we want to do (3), but there was so much discussion I want to make sure that we're making the choice intentionally.

Also, (though maybe a bit late since it's in next): the comment in your patch has some typos in it. But if I'm optimistic maybe we get rid of it in the long run anyway. ;)

-Peff