> Now this one's VERBOSE handling is a bit interesting. Previously we'd
> set VERBOSE even if we were going to show a format. And then later we
> just set the OMIT_STATUS bit, leaving VERBOSE in place:
>
> > - flags |= GPG_VERIFY_OMIT_STATUS;
>
> That _usually_ didn't matter because with OMIT_STATUS, we'd never enter
> print_signature_buffer(), which is where VERBOSE would usually kick in.
> But there's another spot we look at it:
>
> $ grep -nC2 VERBOSE tag.c
> 22-
> 23- if (size == payload_size) {
> 24: if (flags & GPG_VERIFY_VERBOSE)
> 25- write_in_full(1, buf, payload_size);
> 26- return error("no signature found");
>
> So the code prior to your patch actually had another weird behavior. Try
> this:
>
> $ git verify-tag -v --format='my tag is %(tag)' v2.21.0
> my tag is v2.21.0
>
> $ git tag -m bar foo
> $ git verify-tag -v --format='my tag is %(tag)' foo
> object 66395b630f8ca08705b36c359415af8b25da9a11
> type commit
> tag foo
> tagger Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> 1557387618 -0400
>
> bar
> error: no signature found
>
> The "-v" only kicks in when there's an error. I think what your patch is
> doing (consistently ignoring "-v" when there's a format) makes more
> sense. It may be worth alerting the user when "-v" and "--format" are
> used together (or arguably we should _always_ show "-v" if the user
> really asked for it, but it does not make any sense to me for somebody
> to do so).
Aha! I completely missed this but it is indeed weird. Something
similar happened to me when I was sketching some patches for tag
verification in a downstream project...
> > - if (format.format) {
> > + if (format.format)
> > if (verify_ref_format(&format))
> > usage_with_options(verify_tag_usage,
> > verify_tag_options);
> > - }
>
> This leaves us with a weird doubled conditional (with no braces
> either!). Maybe:
>
> if (format.format && verify_ref_format(&format))
> usage_with_options(...);
>
> ?
Yes, I think chaining this if here is cleaner/less error prone.
>
> Other than that, the patch looks good. I think it could use a test in
> t7030, though.
Let me make a re-roll with these changes included and a test suite for
both t7030 or t7004.
Thanks!
-Santiago.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
