From: Johan Herland <johan@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 8:12 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Johan Herland <johan@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>>> +{
>>>> + char *end = strchr(arg, '=');
>>>> + if (!end)
>>>> + end = strchr(arg, ':');
>>>
>>> So both '=' (preferred) and ':' are accepted as field/value
>>> separators. That's ok for the command-line, I believe.
>>
>> Why?
>>
>> Sometimes you have to be loose from the beginning _if_ some existing
>> uses and established conventions make it easier for the users,
The users are already used to appending "Acked-by: Joe <joe@xxxxxxxxxxx>".
So I think it makes it easier for the user to accept what they are already
used to provide.
>> but
>> if you do not have to start from being loose, it is almost always a
>> mistake to do so. The above code just closed the door to use ":"
>> for some other useful purposes we may later discover, and will make
>> us regret for doing so.
>
> Although I agree with the principle, I think there are (at least) two
> established conventions that will be commonly used from the start, and
> that we should support:
>
> - Using short forms with '=', e.g. "ack=Peff". There is already a
> convention on how we specify <name> + <value> pairs on the command
> line, e.g. "git -c foo=bar ..."
>
> - Copy-pasting footers from existing commit messages. These will have
> the same format as the expected output of this command, and not
> accepting the same format in its input seems silly, IMHO.
I agree. Also I think it will avoid some mistakes by the users.
Because it would require an effort for them to remember that if they
want to see "Acked-by: Joe <joe@xxxxxxxxxxx>" they have to put
"Acked-by= Joe <joe@xxxxxxxxxxx>" on the command line.
> That said, I think this applies only to the formatting on the _command
> line_.
But wouldn't it be nice if the same parsing function could be used for
both the command line and the commit message template?
> When it comes to how the resulting footers are formatted in the
> commit message, I would argue it only makes sense to use ':', and I
> think the testcase named 'with config setup and = sign' in the above
> patch is ugly and unnecessary.
I wanted to support configurations like this:
[trailer "ack"]
value = "Acked-by= "
[trailer "bug"]
value = "Bug #"
because Peff said that GitHub uses '#' and while at it I suppose some
people might prefer '=' over ':'.
Thanks,
Christian.
--
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