Hi Eric, On Mon, Apr 22, 2019 at 03:07:25AM -0400, Eric Sunshine wrote: > On Mon, Apr 22, 2019 at 1:07 AM Denton Liu <liu.denton@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > [...] > > Rewrite `get_merge_tool` to return whether or not the tool was guessed > > and make git-mergetool call this function instead of duplicating the > > logic. Also, let `$GIT_MERGETOOL_GUI` be set to determine whether or not > > the guitool will be selected. > > > > Signed-off-by: Denton Liu <liu.denton@xxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > diff --git a/Documentation/git-mergetool--lib.txt b/Documentation/git-mergetool--lib.txt > > @@ -28,7 +28,10 @@ to define the operation mode for the functions listed below. > > get_merge_tool:: > > - returns a merge tool. > > + returns '$is_guessed:$merge_tool'. '$is_guessed' is 'true' if > > + the tool was guessed, else 'false'. '$merge_tool' is the merge > > + tool to use. '$GIT_MERGETOOL_GUI' may be set to 'true' to search > > + for the appropriate guitool. > > What is the likelihood that code outside of our control is using this > function? If there is such code, this backward-incompatible change > will break that code. If the likelihood is excessively small, perhaps > it is not worth worrying about, otherwise, perhaps this warrants a new > function with a distinct name. Thanks for considering this, I hadn't thought about it myself. I assumed this was an internal function but I guess I was wrong. I did a bit of digging on GitHub and Google and I found that git-diffall[1] uses it, although it seems quite old and unmaintained. Aside from this, I can't find any other open-source programs which use git-mergetool--lib (and in particular, get_merge_tool) so I believe that it is pretty rare. That being said, I'm open to writing a new function so that the change will be backwards compatible. I'll see what the list has to say. Thanks, Denton [1]: https://github.com/thenigan/git-diffall
