On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 10:24:55AM -0500, Jeff King wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 15, 2017 at 01:47:01PM -0500, santiago@xxxxxxx wrote:
>
> > From: Lukas Puehringer <luk.puehringer@xxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > Calling functions for gpg_verify_tag() may desire to print relevant
> > information about the header for further verification. Add an optional
> > format argument to print any desired information after GPG verification.
>
> Hrm. Maybe I am missing something, but what does:
>
> verify_and_format_tag(sha1, name, fmt, flags);
>
> get you over:
>
> gpg_verify_tag(sha1, name, flags);
> pretty_print_ref(name, sha1, fmt);
>
> ? The latter seems much more flexible, and I do not see how the
> verification step impacts the printing at all (or vice versa).
>
> I could understand it more if there were patches later in the series
> that somehow used the format and verification results together. But I
> didn't see that.
Having read through the rest of the series, it looks like you'd
sometimes have to do:
int ret;
ret = gpg_verify_tag(sha1, name, flags);
pretty_print_ref(name, sha1, fmt);
if (ret)
... do something ...
and this function lets you do it in a single line.
Still, I think I'd rather see it done as a wrapper than modifying
gpg_verify_tag().
-Peff