Re: [PATCH] t4013: add expected failure for "log --patch --no-patch"
- From
Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com>
- Date
- May 9, 2023, 01:07 UTC
- Message-ID
- <64599cc234708_7c6829426@chronos.notmuch>
- In-Reply-To
- <xmqq1qjwj7go.fsf@gitster.g>
Junio C Hamano wrote:
Show 18 quoted lines
> Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes: > > Sergey Organov <sorganov@gmail.com> writes: > > > >> --patch followed by --no-patch is to be a no-op according to the "git > >> log" manual page. > > > > I briefly wondered if it is a bug in the documentation. > > ... when "git log -p --raw" shows both patch and raw, I do not > > think of a reason why "git log -p --raw --no-patch" should not > > behave similarly. > > So, to tie the loose ends, "log -p --raw --no-patch" and "log -p > --stat --no-patch" do behave similarly. Where my reaction was > mistaken was that I did not read the manual page myself that clearly > said it is the same as "-s" that suppresses diff output (where "diff > output" is not limited to "patch"---diffstat is also output of "diff"), > and incorrectly thought that "--no-patch" would countermand only > "--patch" and nothing else.
If Sergey, you, and me all agreed on what `--no-patch` should do (without reading the manpage), isn't that an indication that that is the expected behavior?
The fact that the documentation documents some unexpected behavior, doesn't mean it isn't a bug.
I would say it's a documented bug.
-- Felipe Contreras