Re: [PATCH v2] Fix notes handling in rev-list
- From
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
- Date
- Jul 19, 2012, 17:20 UTC
- Message-ID
- <7vr4s7vfal.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
- In-Reply-To
- <20120719113535.GA29774@sigill.intra.peff.net>
Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:
Show 6 quoted lines
> Unlike elements of the commit object itself, like --parents or > --timestamp, notes do not really gain any efficiency by being printed as > part of the traversal. So modulo the cost of piping the list of commits, > it would not really be any more efficient than "git rev-list | git notes > list --stdin" (except that the latter does not take a --stdin argument, > but could easily do so). And the latter is way more flexible.
Yeah, I prefer that (not that I think we need either badly).
> So for plumbing, I think this is the wrong direction, anyway. The real > value of this patch is that the pretty-printed code path would work more > like git-log (especially the "%N" format, which lets callers make their > own micro-format for specifying all the bits they are interested in).
Yeah, but at that point the obvious question becomes "why you aren't using 'git log' in the first place".
> Maybe the best thing is to simply disallow --notes when not using a > pretty-printed format.
Yeah, or simply ignore it.