Re: [PATCHv2 6/7] builtin/describe.c: describe a blob

From: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Date: Nov 1, 2017, 12:32 UTC
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.21.1.1711011329300.6482@virtualbox>
In-Reply-To: <xmqqbmkmvdrq.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>

Hi Junio,

On Wed, 1 Nov 2017, Junio C Hamano wrote:

Show 8 quoted lines

> Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com> writes:
> 
> > +If the given object refers to a blob, it will be described
> > +as `<commit-ish>:<path>`, such that the blob can be found
> > +at `<path>` in the `<commit-ish>`. Note, that the commit is likely
> 
> Does the code describe a9dbc3f12c as v2.15.0:GIT-VERSION-GEN, or
> would it always be <commit>:<path>?

As the blob is described using this function:

static void process_object(struct object *obj, const char *path, void *data)
{
       struct process_commit_data *pcd = data;

       if (!oidcmp(&pcd->looking_for, &obj->oid) && !pcd->dst->len) {
               reset_revision_walk();
               describe_commit(&pcd->current_commit, pcd->dst);
               strbuf_addf(pcd->dst, ":%s", path);
       }
}

i.e. as `describe_commit()` is used on the commit part, the answer to your question is: the former. I guess that is why Stefan wrote `commit-ish` instead of `commit` ;-)

Show 9 quoted lines

> > +not the commit that introduced the blob, but the one that was found
> > +first; to find the commit that introduced the blob, you need to find
> 
> Because we do not want to descend into the same tree object we saw
> earlier, this "we show the name we happened to find first without
> attempting to refine it for a better name" is a rather fundamental
> limitation of this approach.  Hopefully we can later improve it with
> more thought, but for now it is better than nothing (and much better
> than "git log --raw | grep").

Indeed.

Ciao, Dscho