Re: [PATCH] completion: complete paths for git send-email
- From
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
- Date
- Jul 21, 2026, 17:09 UTC
- Message-ID
- <xmqqcxwgz2u3.fsf@gitster.g>
- In-Reply-To
- <CALnO6CAuitGp_xLYkXpkQYV9oiXsNNfsXZ_OqzkW7_6ND49=LA@mail.gmail.com>
"D. Ben Knoble" <ben.knoble@gmail.com> writes:
Show 15 quoted lines
> On Sun, Jul 19, 2026 at 9:45 AM Yury Norov (NVIDIA) > <yury.norov@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> From: Yury Norov <ynorov@nvidia.com> >> >> git send-email accepts either revisions or paths to patch files, but its >> Bash completion only offers revisions. This prevents patch files from >> being completed. It can also make a prefix such as "0" expand to an >> unrelated hexadecimal ref even when matching 0001-*.patch files exist. >> >> In my Linux tree, an attempt to autocomplete the standard-named patch >> brings a random hashtag: > > It is unusual to call this a "hashtag." Perhaps "hash" or "object > name" (or id) based on the glossary and datamodel docs?
Very good point, but I am not sure if the author truly meant object names here. The reproduction test uses a long hexadecimal string, but that is not an object name; it is an unusual-looking tag name. It is like naming a topic branch '012345' and complaining that:
$ git send-email 0<TAB>
completes the input to the branch name while ignoring the 0001-changes.patch file.
When you have a branch named '0-tolerance-policy' and:
$ git send-email 0<TAB>
completes to that branch name, you would not dream of complaining about the completion. IOW, I think the complaint is somewhat unfair to begin with.
Actually, I do not know if the completion script really expands an abbreviated object name to a full one. I tried:
$ git rev-parse seen^2
179eccf0d01729c19a3238905b951b1880aa4ba1
$ git checkout master
$ . contrib/completion/git-completion.bash
$ git send-email 17<TAB>and waited for some time, but it did not complete to anything.
In any case, when both a '0001-my-changes.patch' file and a '0-tolerance-policy' branch exist in your repository and current working directory, running:
$ git send-email 0<TAB>
should offer both as candidates, I thihk. Since I only ever pass filenames to the command, I personally do not think it is a huge loss if the completion script stops looking at refs and sticks to filenames only, but others may have a use for that feature.