On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 12:57:28PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes: > > > We should also consider briefly whether anybody is relying on --oneline > > for machine parsing. I think "log --oneline" is fair game, but I wonder > > if people calling "rev-list --decorate --oneline" should be considered. > > It seems kind of unlikely to me, considering that the decorate output is > > ambiguous to parse anyway (if you see parentheses, you cannot tell if it > > is decorate output or part of the commit subject). > > Yeah, I do not think it is likely. Among the in-tree scripts, > git-stash does use rev-list --oneline but the purpose of the call > exactly is to grab a human readable one line summary, and it will be > happy with any change to make --oneline more human readble. Yeah, that makes sense. > t4202 has many invocations of "log --oneline --decorate", though; > these things do get tested. I think it is just trying to compare the "log.decorate" variable to the "--decorate" command-line option. Notice that it generates the expected output by running the latter. So I think it would be OK (and if not, I think it would make sense to update the test, as it does not care about the specific format). Google Code Search doesn't show anything interesting, though I suppose its results are getting continually out of date (they claim to have shut it down, though you can still query it if you use the right URL). -Peff -- 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