Re: [PATCH 1/1] [Outreachy] merge-ours: include parse-options

From: George Espinoza <gespinoz2019@gmail.com>
Date: Oct 30, 2019, 09:53 UTC
Message-ID: <CAP_ANimgFVuq1U6xB=UMQZ-uQp2PayuD82EBAup20eZK3Fv8AA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <xmqqk18n3s3i.fsf@gitster-ct.c.googlers.com>

On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 at 7:05 PM Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:

Show 13 quoted lines

>
> "george espinoza via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > From: george espinoza <gespinoz2019@gmail.com>
> >
> > Teach this command which currently handles its own argv to use
> > parse-options instead because parse-options helps make sure we handle
> > user input like -h in a standardized way across the project.
>
> Sorry, but why do we even want to do this?  merge-ours is an
> implementation detail of "git merge" and is never run directly by
> end-users.
>

Hello Junio, this is my mistake. I am a first time contributor. I'm currently working on Micro Project #3 as an Outreachy applicant that states, "Teach a command which currently handles its own argv how to use parse-options instead."

I was under the impression that all commands with the NOPARSE_OPT flag in git.c needed parse-options added. I now see that I should take into account for commands that are only ran by end-users :)

Show 8 quoted lines

> I am not sure why it even needs "-h" in the first place, but that is
> already there, so letting sleeping dog lie would be what I would
> prefer.
>
> Is there a plan to add some -Xmerge-backend-option to this program,
> and would use of parse-options API make it easier?  That would be a
> good reason to start using it in this program, but otherwise...
>

I will look into finding another command to contribute to instead after your feedback so I can fulfill Micro Project #3 since I had not thought of further plans past the parse-option replacement. Thank you for your input!