Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes: > 1. Behave more or less the same between "git name-rev $sha1" and "echo > $sha1 | git name-rev --stdin". Your patch improves that. Though I > note that --peel-to-commit does not affect --stdin at all. Should > it? And of course the two differ in that the command line will take > any rev-parse expression, and --stdin only looks for full sha1s. To "Should it?", I do not deeply care. "--peel-to-commit" is an exception that only is needed to support "describe". I could instead have tucked "^0" at the end of each argument when "describe" calls out to "name-rev" without adding this new option, which is much much closer to what is really going on. And that will alleviate your #2 below. > 2. If name-rev prints "$X $Y", I would expect "git rev-parse $X" to > equal "git rev-parse $Y". With peeling, that is not the case, and > you get the misleading example that Ram showed: > > $ git name-rev 8af0605 > 8af0605 tags/v1.8.3^0 > > or more obviously weird: > > $ git name-rev v1.8.3 > v1.8.3 tags/v1.8.3^0 > > So I think your series moves in a good direction, but I would just worry > that it is breaking backwards compatibility (but like I said, I am not > clear on who is affected and what it means for them). -- 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