Re: [RFC/PATCH] tests: support testing with an arbitrary default branch (sort of)

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

 



Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@xxxxxx> writes:

> Hi Junio & Ævar,
>
> On Wed, 18 Nov 2020, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
>> Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>
>> > P.S.: Shouldn't the pull patch in d18c950a69f be using the advice
>> >      facility, not warning()?
>>
>> I think warning() is the right thing here, as it is self squelching.
>> Setting pull.rebase (even to 'false') is sufficient---there is no
>> need to set advise.setpullrebase to 'false' on top.
>
> Right. The only reason to use `advise()` would be to allow users to
> squelch the warning by setting `advice.*`.
>
> On the other hand, warnings are not colored, but advice messages are.
>
> And now I realize that the same holds for `init.defaultBranch`: it is also
> self-squelching. And it also might benefit from the coloring to make it
> stand out a bit.
>
> Thoughts?

I do not see colors well.  You'll always get "find some other way to
make it stand out more to those like us---if you canhdo so without
colors, that would be ideal" from me, so please don't ask me to vote
for more colors.






[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