From: Dana How <danahow@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 04 May 2007 18:23:21 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Support ent:relative_path
Message-ID: <56b7f5510705041123h7fc1f95djbf7c2d75466b4193@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <7vabwktsng.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>

On 5/4/07, Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net> wrote:
> Johannes Sixt <J.Sixt@eudaptics.com> writes:
>
> > Alex Riesen wrote:
> >> On 5/4/07, Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net> wrote:
> >> > My preference is (2), (3) and then (1), but I do not have
> >> > offhand a suggestion for a good metacharacter we could use.
> >>
> >> "./" :)
> >
> > +1, without the :)
> > and ../ should DWIM, too.
>
> I think these feel more or less natural (except that we do not
> say ":/fullpath" and instead say ":fullpath" which is
> unfortunate).
>
> In the hindsight, if we had the perfect vision into the future,
> we would have made <path> relative to where you are when we
> initially did "<something>:<path>", with obvious semantics for
> things like "<something>:../<path>" and "<something>:/<path>".
>
> We didn't.  Further, we made a mistake to make :/ to mean
> something completely unrelated.  My bad.
>
> So I think "./" is the best compromise in the meantime.
>
> With your suggestion, we can train people's fingers to type "./"
> now, and perhaps later in one of those big feature release like
> the 1.5.0 was, we could switch to "default to relative".
>
> At the same time of that big "UI correction", we could make
> "<something>:/<path>" to mean "full path in commit (or
> index/stage) no matter where I am".
>
> The current ":/<string>" is about going back, looking for the
> string, so it should not have used '/'; instead it should have
> been "<something>:?<string>".  Maybe we could fix it by start
> accepting ":?" now (in addition to ":/"), give a big fat warning
> about ":/" going to mean a different thing, and encouraging
> users to use the question-mark form, in preparation for the big
> "UI correction".
>
> Do people like that plan?
>
> (soon after 1.5.2)
>
>  - start accepting "<something>:./<path>" as "relative to where I am".
>
>  - start accepting "<something>:?<string>" as "look back to find
>    the string".
>
>  - clearly explain the plan and prepare the users.
>
> (a big release in the future, perhaps 1.6.0)
>
>  - "<something>:<path>" becomes relative to where you are.
>  - stop "<something>:/<string>" and start "<something>:/<fullpath>".

I will resubmit the patch following Junio's plan.
It will include the "1.6.0" features but disabled.

I would just request that we expedite,  if possible,
at least the later switch from "<something>:/<string>"
to "<something>:/<fullpath>",
since with the patch _and_ the latter behavior enabled,
scripts can be updated to always insert "./" or "/" and
their intent will always be clear.

Thanks,
-- 
Dana L. How  danahow@gmail.com  +1 650 804 5991 cell