Re: [PATCH, v2] tag: implement --[no-]strip option

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

 



"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

>> > @@ -356,7 +362,7 @@ static void create_tag(const unsigned char *object, const char *tag,
>> >  
>> >  		if (!is_null_sha1(prev))
>> >  			write_tag_body(fd, prev);
>> > -		else
>> > +		else if (opt->strip)
>> >  			write_or_die(fd, _(tag_template), strlen(_(tag_template)));
>> 
>> Why are you not writing template when no strip is done? (Not an objection
>> disguised as a rhetorical question, but a question).
>> 
>> The user who typed "tag -a v1.2.3 HEAD" that spawns an editor would still
>> find it useful to have commented instructions, once we start filling the
>> template with more useful information that is customized for the
>> situation (e.g. "git show -s --oneline" output), no?
>
> Yes. But in this case commented instructions will not be stripped and they
> will go to the message. I think user will be confused.
>
> We can show show some instructions before spawning the editor. What do
> you think?

My knee-jerk reaction is that it would be worse than what your patch
does. I'd say we'd start from your patch and see how users of 'next'
reacts while the topic is cooking.
--
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]