Re: [PATCH] git-rev-list: fix --header

From: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Date: Apr 17, 2006, 21:42 UTC
Message-ID: <7vhd4rlw0m.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.63.0604172222390.19593@wbgn013.biozentrum.uni-wuerzburg.de>

Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> writes:

Show 6 quoted lines

>> Wouldn't this be simpler and do the same thing, I wonder?  The
>> point being that "--pretty --header" and "--header --pretty"
>> traditionally did not make --header to override --pretty.
>
> I thought, why not fix that bug, too? After all, it is counterintuitive 
> what "--header --pretty" does, and it was easy to fix.

I checked with 0.99.9m and both "--pretty --header" and "--header --pretty" gives preference to --pretty. I think your patch changes it to favor whichever comes later.

I thought it could be considered a bug to accept --header and --pretty at the same time without complaining, but if you want to forbid it, you could error out. However, that might break existing Porcelains, and that's why I suggested to keep the traditional "--pretty wins over --header" behaviour.

If gitk were the only Porcelain we care about that uses --header, it would make more sense to change the rule to "--header trumps --pretty" and "gitk --pretty" would magically start working.

Still undecided. As you say it is an easy change, so I'd rather leave the behaviour as before for now.