Re: [PATCH v7 3/4] vimdiff: add tool documentation
- From
Philippe Blain <levraiphilippeblain@gmail.com>
- Date
- Mar 29, 2022, 17:08 UTC
- Message-ID
- <d0a0d00b-5c1a-4a0c-a91c-b03403578f80@gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <xmqqmth8wwcf.fsf@gitster.g>
Hi Junio,
Le 2022-03-29 à 12:35, Junio C Hamano a écrit :
Show 55 quoted lines
> Philippe Blain <levraiphilippeblain@gmail.com> writes:
>
>>> Running 'git {merge,diff}tool --tool-help' now also prints usage
>>> information about the vimdiff tool (and its variantes) instead of just
>>> its name.
>>>
>>> Two new functions ('diff_cmd_help()' and 'merge_cmd_help()') have been
>>> added to the set of functions that each merge tool (ie. scripts found
>>> inside "mergetools/") can overwrite to provided tool specific
>>> information.
>>>
>>> Right now, only 'mergetools/vimdiff' implements these functions, but
>>> other tools are encouraged to do so in the future, specially if they
>>> take configuration options not explained anywhere else (as it is the
>>> case with the 'vimdiff' tool and the new 'layout' option)
>>>
>>> In addition, a section has been added to
>>> "Documentation/git-mergetool.txt" to explain the new "layout"
>>> configuration option with examples.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Fernando Ramos <greenfoo@u92.eu>
>>> Signed-off-by: Philippe Blain <levraiphilippeblain@gmail.com>
>>
>> Thanks :) I think the project convention is to also use the
>> 'Co-authored-by' trailer as well :)
>
> If co-authors closely worked together (possibly but not necessarily
> outside the public view), exchanging drafts and agreeing on the
> final version before sending it to the list, by one approving the
> other's final draft, Co-authored-by may be appropriate.
>
> I am not sure if that is what happened.
>
> I would prefer to see more use of Helped-by when suggestions for
> improvements were made, possibly but not necessarily in a concrete
> "squashable patch" form, the original author accepted before sending
> the new version out, and the party who made suggestions saw the
> updated version at the same time as the general public.
>
> In addition, especially if it was not co-authored, the chain of
> sign-off should mirror how the patches flowed. If philippe helped
> to improve Fernando's original idea, and Fernando assembled this
> version before sending it out to the list, then
>
> Helped-by: Philippe
> Signed-off-by: Philippe
> Signed-off-by: Fernando
>
> Philippe's sign-off would help when his contribution is so big that
> it by itself makes a copyrightable work, which may be the case. If
> not (e.g. when pointing out trivial typo or grammo), it is simpler
> to omit it.
>
> If this were truly co-authored, then replace "Helped-by" in the
> above sequence with "Co-authored-by".Thanks for clarifying all that (whatever happened to the "Mailing list etiquette series [1]... it would be nice to revive this:).
I did not mean to "claim" co-authorship by the way, I agree that "Helped-by" is more appropriate in this case. I included my sign-off mostly by accident as my 'ci' Git alias in this project is 'commit --sign-off' ;)
Show 21 quoted lines
> >>> +mergetool.vimdiff.layout:: >>> + The vimdiff backend uses this variable to control how its split >>> + windows look like. Applies even if you are using Neovim (`nvim`) or >>> + gVim (`gvim`) as the merge tool. See BACKEND SPECIFIC HINTS section >>> +ifndef::git-mergetool[] >>> + (on linkgit:git-mergetool[1]) >> >> small nit: "in linkgit:git-mergetool[1]" would read slightly better I think, >> but that may be just me... and I think I would drop the parentheses. > > I agree on both counts. > >>> shown_any=yes >>> - printf "%s%s\n" "$per_line_prefix" "$toolname" >>> + printf "%s%-15s %s\n" "$per_line_prefix" "$toolname" $(diff_mode && diff_cmd_help "$toolname" || merge_cmd_help "$toolname") >>> fi >> >> I tried this and it looks much better on a single line, nice! > > You mean that the output on a single line is better than multiple lines?
Yes.
Show 20 quoted lines
> >> I also noticed that the list of available tools is embedded in 'git help config' >> (see the rule for "mergetools-list.made" in Documentation/Makefile). I looked >> at the generated 'git-config.html' and it is not ideal; it would be better if >> the tool names would be enclosed in backticks. I tried the following tweak: >> >> diff --git a/Documentation/Makefile b/Documentation/Makefile >> index ed656db2ae..a2201680a2 100644 >> --- a/Documentation/Makefile >> +++ b/Documentation/Makefile >> @@ -333,10 +333,10 @@ mergetools-list.made: ../git-mergetool--lib.sh $(wildcard ../mergetools/*) >> $(QUIET_GEN) \ >> $(SHELL_PATH) -c 'MERGE_TOOLS_DIR=../mergetools && \ >> . ../git-mergetool--lib.sh && \ >> - show_tool_names can_diff "* " || :' >mergetools-diff.txt && \ >> + show_tool_names can_diff "* " || :' | sed -e "s/* \([a-z0-9]*\)/* \`\1\`:/" >mergetools-diff.txt && \ > > If you are piping the output into a sed command, then you discard > the exit status of the upstream of the pipe, so " || :" at the end > of the shell command can be discarded, no?
Yes, you are right.
Show 15 quoted lines
> >> $(SHELL_PATH) -c 'MERGE_TOOLS_DIR=../mergetools && \ >> . ../git-mergetool--lib.sh && \ >> - show_tool_names can_merge "* " || :' >mergetools-merge.txt && \ >> + show_tool_names can_merge "* " || :' | sed -e "s/* \([a-z0-9]*\)/* \`\1\`:/" >mergetools-merge.txt && \ >> date >$@ > > Ditto. > > In any case, the raw output from the command are of the form > > * <name of the tool> <explanation> > > Is the idea that you want to enclose the <name of the tool> part > inside `literal`?
Yes, exactly, and add ': ' after the name of the tool. This makes the HTML doc for 'git-config' more nicely formatted.
> > I do not know if the inclusion of <explanation> part in the output > is sensible in the first place (without this series, we only showed > the possible values, right),
Right. I think it is a very nice addition, as several mergetool "names" are not the same as the program name or the executable name, so I think it's nice for the user to spell out exactly which software we are refering to :)
Show 18 quoted lines
> but if we wanted to do this, shouldn't > we be doing, instead of doing > > * araxis Use Araxis Merge > > more like > > araxis;; > Use Araxis > > I wonder. The logical structure of each line is unclear with the > current output (the asterisk is meaningful in that it tells that the > line is an item in a bulleted list, but among the words on the rest > of the line, the first line is special only by convention, so in a > manpage for example, it looks like a gramatically correct sentence > "Use Araxis Merge" is somehow prefixed by a stray word that does not > begin with uppercase). >
OK, I see you mean using an Asciidoc "description list" [2]. I agree with you that it would be more semantically correct. So, let's use this instead:
diff --git a/Documentation/Makefile b/Documentation/Makefile index ed656db2ae..de0b5fed42 100644 --- a/Documentation/Makefile +++ b/Documentation/Makefile @@ -333,10 +333,10 @@ mergetools-list.made: ../git-mergetool--lib.sh $(wildcard ../mergetools/*) $(QUIET_GEN) \ $(SHELL_PATH) -c 'MERGE_TOOLS_DIR=../mergetools && \ . ../git-mergetool--lib.sh && \ - show_tool_names can_diff "* " || :' >mergetools-diff.txt && \ + show_tool_names can_diff' | sed -e "s/\([a-z0-9]*\)/\`\1\`;;/" >mergetools-diff.txt && \ $(SHELL_PATH) -c 'MERGE_TOOLS_DIR=../mergetools && \ . ../git-mergetool--lib.sh && \ - show_tool_names can_merge "* " || :' >mergetools-merge.txt && \ + show_tool_names can_merge' | sed -e "s/\([a-z0-9]*\)/\`\1\`;;/" >mergetools-merge.txt && \ date >$@ TRACK_ASCIIDOCFLAGS = $(subst ','\'',$(ASCIIDOC_COMMON):$(ASCIIDOC_HTML):$(ASCIIDOC_DOCBOOK)) [1] https://lore.kernel.org/git/20210512233412.10737-1-dwh@linuxprogrammer.org/ [2] https://docs.asciidoctor.org/asciidoc/latest/lists/description/