Re: rev-parse vs. rev-list --no-walk

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Sat, May 1, 2010 at 4:05 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> 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.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]