From: Eric Sunshine Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2013 03:03:30 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH] cat-file: print tags raw for "cat-file -p" Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <20130417210048.GA635@sigill.intra.peff.net> On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 5:00 PM, Jeff King wrote: > Subject: [PATCH] cat-file: print tags raw for "cat-file -p" > > When "cat-file -p" prints commits, it shows them in their > raw format, since git's format is already human-readable. > For tags, however, we print the whole thing raw except for > one thing: we convert the timestamp on the tagger line into a > human-readable date. > [...] > Let's drop the tagger-date formatting for "cat-file -p". It > makes us more consistent with cat-file's commit > pretty-printer, and as a bonus, we can drop the hand-rolled > tag parsing code in cat-file (which happened to behave > inconsistently with the tag pretty-printing code elsewhere). > > This is a change of output format, so it's possible that > some callers could considered this a regression. However, s/considered/consider/ > the original behavior was arguably a bug (due to the > inconsistency with commits), likely nobody was relying on it > (even we do not use it ourselves these days), and anyone > relying on the "-p" pretty-printer should be able to expect > a change in the output format (i.e., while "cat-file" is > plumbing, the output format of "-p" was never guaranteed to > be stable). > > Signed-off-by: Jeff King