From: Derrick Stolee <derrickstolee@github.com>
Date: Fri, 09 Sep 2022 12:23:28 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 07/11] log: add default decoration filter
Message-ID: <42db9da3-3f69-1bf0-6d88-692e18eb74c1@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <kl6lr10l8t7y.fsf@chooglen-macbookpro.roam.corp.google.com>

On 9/8/2022 5:13 PM, Glen Choo wrote:
> "Derrick Stolee via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@gmail.com> writes:
> 
>> From: Derrick Stolee <derrickstolee@github.com>
>>
>> When a user runs 'git log', they expect a certain set of helpful
>> decorations. This includes:
>>
>> * The HEAD ref
>> * Branches (refs/heads/)
>> * Stashes (refs/stash)
>> * Tags (refs/tags/)
>> * Remote branches (refs/remotes/)
>> * Replace refs (refs/replace/ or $GIT_REPLACE_REF_BASE)
>>
>> Each of these namespaces was selected due to existing test cases that
>> verify these namespaces appear in the decorations. In particular,
>> stashes and replace refs can have custom colors from the
>> color.decorate.<slot> config option.
> 
> I _just_ noticed that refs/bisect/* isn't part of this list, but I'd
> presume that users want to see those decorations (or I do, at least).
> Was that an intentional omission?

It was an intentional omission because the refs/bisect/* references
are not part of the color.decorate.<slot> category.

Looking into it further, the bisect refs look pretty ugly (especially
the ones like "refs/bisect/good-<hash>").

If you would like to include these in the default filter, then I
would recommend also adding a color.decorate.<slot> category for them
and possibly replace the "refs/bisect" with just "bisect". Alternatively,
you could take a hint from replace objects and just use an indicator
like "bisect good" or "bisect bad" instead of listing the full ref name.

Thanks,
-Stolee