On Mon, Apr 02 2018, Harald Nordgren wrote: > In regards the the print statement, it was only moved down according > to the diff because I added more logic above. Basically there is 1) > the unrolling of the linked list to an array and 2) the printing > logic. I could move it and make the diff smaller, but that probably > makes the code a tiny bit more complicated. I was just wondering since it wasn't explained in the commit message, makes sense to copy this explanation into v2, or lead with a purely code re-arrangement patch. > It would be nice to have a uniform option like > '--sort=version:refname'. But spending a few hours to look over the > code, it seems that ls-remote.c would require a lot of rewrites if we > wanted to start using `ref_array` and `ref_array_item` for storing the > refs. > > Which seems necessary in order to hook in to the sorting flow used in > other subcommands. That, or reimplement `cmp_ref_sorting`. But maybe > I'm missing something? I'm thinking just in terms of UI. If it's the case that porting this to whatever guts git-tag uses for sorting would be hard, then we could still use the same command-line option convention (and perhaps just die if anything except --sort=version:refname is supplied). Changing the underlying implementation is easier than cleaning up UI-differences that (seemingly) only arose due to underlying implementation details at the time. > On Mon, Apr 2, 2018 at 8:37 AM, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason > <avarab@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> On Mon, Apr 02 2018, Harald Nordgren wrote: >> >>> Create the options '-V ' and '--version-sort' to sort >>> 'git ls-remote' output by version semantics. This is useful e.g. for >>> the Go repository after the release of version 1.10, where otherwise >>> v1.10 is sorted before v1.2. See: >>> >>> $ git ls-remote -t https://go.googlesource.com/go >>> ... >>> 205f850ceacfc39d1e9d76a9569416284594ce8c refs/tags/go1.1 >>> d260448f6b6ac10efe4ae7f6dfe944e72bc2a676 refs/tags/go1.1.1 >>> 1d6d8fca241bb611af51e265c1b5a2e9ae904702 refs/tags/go1.1.2 >>> bf86aec25972f3a100c3aa58a6abcbcc35bdea49 refs/tags/go1.10 >>> ac7c0ee26dda18076d5f6c151d8f920b43340ae3 refs/tags/go1.10.1 >>> 9ce6b5c2ed5d3d5251b9a6a0c548d5fb2c8567e8 refs/tags/go1.10beta1 >>> 594668a5a96267a46282ce3007a584ec07adf705 refs/tags/go1.10beta2 >>> 5348aed83e39bd1d450d92d7f627e994c2db6ebf refs/tags/go1.10rc1 >>> 20e228f2fdb44350c858de941dff4aea9f3127b8 refs/tags/go1.10rc2 >>> 1c5438aae896edcd1e9f9618f4776517f08053b3 refs/tags/go1.1rc2 >>> 46a6097aa7943a490e9bd2e04274845d0e5e200f refs/tags/go1.1rc3 >>> 402d3590b54e4a0df9fb51ed14b2999e85ce0b76 refs/tags/go1.2 >>> 9c9802fad57c1bcb72ea98c5c55ea2652efc5772 refs/tags/go1.2.1 >>> ... >> >> This is a sensible thing to want, but why not follow the UI we have for >> this with git-tag? I.e. --sort=<key> & -i (or --ignore-case)? Of course >> ls-remote doesn't just show tags, so maybe we'd want --tag-sort=<key> >> and --ignore-tag-case or something, but the rest should be equivalent, >> no? >> >>> [...] >>> @@ -101,13 +115,22 @@ int cmd_ls_remote(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix) >>> if (transport_disconnect(transport)) >>> return 1; >>> >>> - if (!dest && !quiet) >>> - fprintf(stderr, "From %s\n", *remote->url); >>> for ( ; ref; ref = ref->next) { >>> if (!check_ref_type(ref, flags)) >>> continue; >>> if (!tail_match(pattern, ref->name)) >>> continue; >>> + REALLOC_ARRAY(refs, nr + 1); >>> + refs[nr++] = ref; >>> + } >>> + >>> + if (version_sort) >>> + QSORT(refs, nr, cmp_ref_versions); >>> + >>> + if (!dest && !quiet) >>> + fprintf(stderr, "From %s\n", *remote->url); >> >> Is there some subtlety here I'm missing which means that when sorting >> we'd now need to print this "From" line later (i.e. after sorting?
