Re: [PATCH 5/5] ci: add support for GitLab CI
- From
- Phillip Wood <phillip.wood123@gmail.com>
- Date
- Oct 30, 2023, 09:49 UTC
- Message-ID
- <68c4684b-0ab0-427a-90e5-fca602c9d993@gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <ZTv3to98QT8Ma+ag@ugly>
On 27/10/2023 18:47, Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
Show 31 quoted lines
> On Fri, Oct 27, 2023 at 03:32:48PM +0100, Phillip Wood wrote: >> On 27/10/2023 11:43, Oswald Buddenhagen wrote: >>> On Fri, Oct 27, 2023 at 11:22:35AM +0100, Phillip Wood wrote: >>>>>>> + CI_BRANCH="$CI_COMMIT_REF_NAME" >>>>>>> + CI_COMMIT="$CI_COMMIT_SHA" >>>>>>> >>>>>> assignments need no quoting to prevent word splitting. >>>>>> repeats below. >>>>>> >>>> I think it is quite common for us to quote variables when it isn't >>>> strictly necessary as it makes it clear to anyone reading the script >>>> that there is no word splitting going on >>> >>>> and ensures that we don't start splitting the variable if the >>>> contents changes in the future. >>>> >>> the point was that it *isn't* content-dependent; it's simply the >>> shell rules. >> >> Oh, I'd misunderstood what you were saying which was that assignment >> and case statements are not subject to field splitting. >> >>> of course, many people (apparently you included) don't know these >>> subtleties >> >> I find this comment to be condescending, needlessly antagonistic and >> completely at odds with the norms of constructive discussion on this >> list. >> > the observation was necessary for the point i subsequently made (which > was basically agreeing with the first part of your response).
It was not necessary to phrase it as you did though. Before replying on Friday I showed your comment to someone else and their reaction was "That's rude". You could have made your point by saying something like
It is hard to remember all the shell's word splitting rules so
quoting everywhere is not a bad idea.This is not the first time I've found your comments unnecessarily adversarial and at odds with the norms of constructive discussion and respectful disagreement on this list. I don't think I'm the only one either - in [1] Junio points out an ad-hominem remark and in [2] Marc comments on the unreceptive tone of you review responses.
I would urge you to try and strike a more conciliatory tone in your messages - it is perfectly possible to correct or disagree with someone without alienating them in the process.
Best Wishes
Phillip
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/git/xmqqleeihok5.fsf@gitster.g/ [2] https://lore.kernel.org/git/e33f919d-1b6a-4944-ab5d-93ad0d323b68@xiplink.com/