From: Brigham Campbell <me@brighamcampbell.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2026 01:51:52 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] git-contacts: allow inputting patch via stdin
Message-ID: <DLO0S0UUB0EM.1NLQFJUPOMGY0@brighamcampbell.com>
In-Reply-To: <xmqqtsnf477e.fsf@gitster.g>

On Wed Sep 23, 2026 at 10:13 PM MDT, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Brigham Campbell <me@brighamcampbell.com> writes:
>
>> $ git contacts - <patch
>> $ git contacts patch1 - patch3 <patch2
>
> The second one is an example that we could tell the command to read
> these three files in patch1 and then patch2 and then patch3.

Does the order in which arguments are processed matter? If it's a matter
of producing predictable output, I just checked out `master` and I see
that running git-contacts twice produces the same email addresses, but
in different orders for the same two input patches:

	$ git format-patch HEAD~2
	0001-Git-2.56-rc2.patch
	0002-Revert-Merge-branch-en-no-amend-during-conflicts.patch
	$ ./contrib/contacts/git-contacts *.patch
	Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
	Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
	Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
	$ ./contrib/contacts/git-contacts *.patch
	Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
	Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
	Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>

What's more, git-contacts already disregards the order of argv. It will
always scan file contents first and then git rev-lists second, even if
the user passes the rev-list first like follows:

	git contacts HEAD~2.. foo.patch

I would argue that this is not by mistake. The user should have no
expectation as to the order in which arguments are processed. If the
commit message implies that the arguments are processed one after
another, regardless of whether it's a file, a rev-list, or stdin, then
the commit message should be changed.

Do I misunderstand?

-- 
Brigham Campbell
https://brighamcampbell.com