From: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 04 Feb 2019 23:50:23 GMT
Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH] core.abbrev doc: document and test the abbreviation length
Message-ID: <87r2cnkta8.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20190204233235.GB2366@sigill.intra.peff.net>


On Tue, Feb 05 2019, Jeff King wrote:

> On Mon, Feb 04, 2019 at 12:04:21PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
>> Instead of exposing this pretty-much "test-only" feature as a new
>> option to t/helper/test-tool, I think it is OK, if not even better,
>> to have it in rev-parse proper like this patch does.
>>
>> I however have a mildly strong suspition that people would expect
>> "rev-parse --abbrev-len=<num>" to be a synonym of "--short=<num>"
>>
>> As this is pretty-much a test-only option, perhaps going longer but
>> more descriptive would make sense?
>>
>> 	git rev-parse --compute-abbrev-length-for <object-count>
>>
>> may be an overkill, but something along those lines.
>
> You could even default <object-count> to the number of objects in the
> repository. Which implies that perhaps the best spot is the command
> where we already count the number of objects, git-count-objects.

That's documented as reporting loose objects by default, although it has
a full report with -v.

Maybe rev-parse isn't the right place, I just picked it because it seems
to be the general utility belt for stuff that doesn't fit elsewhere.

But putting it in git-count-objects seems like a bit more of a stretch
given the above.