From: Richard Hansen Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2017 17:27:41 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] diff: document behavior of relative diff.orderFile Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <20170110065816.pu325sxajbyuqpj6@sigill.intra.peff.net> On 2017-01-10 01:58, Jeff King wrote: > On Mon, Jan 09, 2017 at 07:40:30PM -0500, Richard Hansen wrote: > >> Document that a relative pathname for diff.orderFile is interpreted as >> relative to the top-level work directory. >> >> Signed-off-by: Richard Hansen >> --- >> Documentation/diff-config.txt | 2 ++ >> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/Documentation/diff-config.txt b/Documentation/diff-config.txt >> index 58f4bd6af..875212045 100644 >> --- a/Documentation/diff-config.txt >> +++ b/Documentation/diff-config.txt >> @@ -101,6 +101,8 @@ diff.noprefix:: >> diff.orderFile:: >> File indicating how to order files within a diff, using >> one shell glob pattern per line. >> + If `diff.orderFile` is a relative pathname, it is treated as >> + relative to the top of the work tree. >> Can be overridden by the '-O' option to linkgit:git-diff[1]. > > What happens in a bare repository? I didn't know which is why this patch is silent on that topic. :) > > I'm guessing it's relative to the top-level of the repository, I just tried it out and it's relative to $PWD. > but we should probably spell it out. Do we want it to be relative to $PWD? I think relative to $GIT_DIR is more useful. If we want it to be relative to $GIT_DIR, then I think we should stay silent regarding bare repositories so that the behavior remains unspecified until we update the logic. > > The other case is --no-index when we are not in a repository at all, but > that should just be relative to the current directory, It is. > which isn't really worth mentioning. Agreed. I'll post a re-roll if people prefer the current behavior over relative to $GIT_DIR. Thanks for reviewing, Richard > > -Peff