On 2017-01-20 23:29, Junio C Hamano wrote:
By the way, I have no strong preference between "read-ref, check
quiet and show-one" and "show-ref", so if you make --verify to
consistently call "show_ref()" for both refs/heads/master and HEAD,
that is also perfectly fine.
This sounds like a good ide
Junio C Hamano writes:
> If two codepaths are called "I don't see a meaningful difference",
> then it is really better to share the same code. Today, they may
> happen to behave identically. When we need to update the behaviour
> of one, we'd be forced to update the other one to match.
>
> IOW,
Vladimir Panteleev writes:
> --quiet will still work correctly with the current patch, because
> show_ref already checks quiet. Granted, the original --verify code
> used show_one and not show_ref; however, I don't see a meaningful
> difference between calling show_ref and show_one for HEAD, othe
Junio C Hamano writes:
> Your log message for the patch needs to be updated by summarizing
> the above better.
Here is my attempt.
"git show-ref HEAD" used with "--verify" (because the user is
not interested in seeing refs/remotes/origin/HEAD), and used
with "--head" (because the
On 2017-01-20 19:03, Junio C Hamano wrote:
and viewed in the wider context, I notice that quiet is not honored
in the added code. I think that is easily fixable by replacing this
hunk with something like:
--quiet will still work correctly with the current patch, because
show_ref already check
Junio C Hamano writes:
>> My use case was the following series of steps:
>> ... long and readable if a bit too verbose description ...
> Your log message for the patch needs to be updated by summarizing
> the above better.
That raises the number of things to improve in the patch to 3 (so
far):
Vladimir Panteleev writes:
> Hi Junio,
>
> On 2017-01-20 19:03, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> Having said all that, using --verify on HEAD does not make much
>> sense, because if HEAD is missing in .git/, I do not think Git
>> considers that directory as a Git repository to begin with. So from
>> tha
And to clarify:
On 2017-01-20 20:26, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
On 2017-01-20 19:03, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Having said all that, using --verify on HEAD does not make much
sense, because if HEAD is missing in .git/, I do not think Git
considers that directory as a Git repository to begin with.
Hi Junio,
On 2017-01-20 19:03, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Having said all that, using --verify on HEAD does not make much
sense, because if HEAD is missing in .git/, I do not think Git
considers that directory as a Git repository to begin with. So from
that point of view, I am not sure what value th
Vladimir Panteleev writes:
> This patch adds --head support to show-ref's --verify logic, by
> explicitly checking if the "HEAD" ref is specified when --head is
> present.
> @@ -207,6 +207,8 @@ int cmd_show_ref(int argc, const char **argv, const char
> *prefix)
> i
Previously, when --verify was specified, --head was being ignored, and
"show-ref --verify --head HEAD" would always print "fatal: 'HEAD' -
not a valid ref". As such, when using show-ref to look up any
ref (including HEAD) precisely by name, one would have to special-case
looking up the HEAD ref.
T
11 matches
Mail list logo
