Re: [PATCH] check-ref-format: require a repository for --branch

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

 



Jeff King wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 07:45:46PM +0900, Junio C Hamano wrote:

>> Here is to illustrate what I mean in a patch form.  It resurrects
>> the gentle setup, and uses a purely textual format check when we are
>> outside the repository, while bypassing the @{magic} interpolation
>> codepath that requires us to be in a repository.  When we are in a
>> repository, we operate the same way as before.
>
> I like the state this puts us in, but there's one catch: we're
> completely changing the meaning of "check-ref-format --branch", aren't
> we?
>
> It is going from "this is how you resolve @{-1}" to "this is how you
> check the validity of a potential branch name". Do we need to pick a
> different name, and/or have a deprecation period?

Sorry to take so long on picking this up.  I'll try to make an
alternate patch today.

For what it's worth, I don't agree with this repurposing of
"check-ref-format --branch" at all.  The old command already existed.
No one asked for the new command.  At most, we could get rid of the
old command after a deprecation period.  I don't understand at all why
it's worth the confusion of changing its meaning.

Thanks,
Jonathan



[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]

  Powered by Linux