Re: [PATCH v1 1/1] rev-list: add --missing=print-only mode

From: Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im>
Date: Apr 20, 2026, 09:55 UTC
Message-ID: <aeX3_nKaCaXOdSE6@pks.im>
In-Reply-To: <491a27af-3ea4-4978-9d51-9c540ad31589@gmail.com>

On Mon, Apr 20, 2026 at 09:57:02AM +0100, Phillip Wood wrote:

Show 21 quoted lines

> On 20/04/2026 08:43, Patrick Steinhardt wrote:
> > On Sun, Apr 19, 2026 at 02:18:40PM +0530, Siddharth Asthana wrote:
> > 
> > >   static struct oidmap missing_objects;
> > >   enum missing_action {
> > > -	MA_ERROR = 0,    /* fail if any missing objects are encountered */
> > > -	MA_ALLOW_ANY,    /* silently allow ALL missing objects */
> > > -	MA_PRINT,        /* print ALL missing objects in special section */
> > > -	MA_PRINT_INFO,   /* same as MA_PRINT but also prints missing object info */
> > > +	MA_ERROR = 0, /* fail if any missing objects are encountered */
> > > +	MA_ALLOW_ANY, /* silently allow ALL missing objects */
> > > +	MA_PRINT, /* print ALL missing objects in special section */
> > > +	MA_PRINT_INFO, /* same as MA_PRINT but also prints missing object info */
> > > +	MA_PRINT_ONLY, /* print ONLY missing objects, without the "?" prefix */
> > 
> > Makes me wonder whether we'll eventually also want to have
> > `MA_PRINT_INFO_ONLY`.
> 
> Perhaps we'd be better to add a "--missing-only" option that limits the
> output to missing objects? That would avoid the problem of
> "--missing=print-only" not really explaining what it does as well.

Yes, I had the same thought.

Patrick