On Tue, Aug 11, 2020 at 04:17:28AM +0000, Emma Brooks wrote: > On 2020-08-10 06:02:49-0400, Jeff King wrote: > > There was a little discussion in response to v1 on whether we could > > reuse the existing C mailmap code: > > > > https://lore.kernel.org/git/20200731010129.GD240563@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ > > > > Did you have any thoughts on that? > > I think it's probably not worth the effort to make the necessary changes > to "rev-list --header" Junio mentioned, just for gitweb. Yeah, I agree that probably doesn't make sense to change "rev-list --header". I wonder if git could be using "rev-list --format" instead, though, and asking for the specific things it wants. That could improve more than just this case, too (e.g., the C code would be parsing and normalizing author/committer idents, which could make handling of badly formatted ones more consistent with other Git tools). It may be a big change, though. I don't know the gitweb code very well. > I agree it's a bit worrisome to have a second parser that could > potentially behave slightly differently than the main implementation. > What if we added tests for gitweb's mailmap parsing based on the same > cases used for Git itself? That would certainly help, though I don't know how easy it would be to replicate all of the tests in a maintainable way. -Peff
