From: Jay Soffian Date: Mon, 03 May 2010 15:22:40 GMT Subject: Re: rev-parse vs. rev-list --no-walk Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <7v1vdv4ccz.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> On Sat, May 1, 2010 at 4:05 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > I think one sane thing to do is to stop adding new rev-flags revision.c > supports to rev-parse (it already lags behind and nobody complained that > rev-parse doesn't understand --first-parent as a rev-flag), and keep its > use as "revision and non revision option sifter" only to support older > scripts written back in v1.0.0 days.  Its primary use these days is "turn > symbolic object names into 40-letter SHA-1", but "option sifter" aspect of > the command seems to have outlived its usefulness. We tell scripters to be careful to use the plumbing and not the porcelain. From that standpoint, shouldn't we do our best to prevent the plumbing from falling into disrepair? (Or perhaps I'm reading too much into what you say.) j.