Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > Sergey Organov <sorganov@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > >> Here is a patch that fixes diff-index to accept --cc again: > > Sorry for the delay; I did not notice there was a patch buried in a > discussion thread. Sorry from my side as well. I was already about to re-submit the patch properly, but you happened to be faster with this ) > > We might later need to do this suppression in more codepaths if we > find more regressions, but let's have one fix at a time. > > Will queue. > >> builtin/diff-index.c | 6 +++--- >> diff-merges.c | 14 ++++---------- >> diff-merges.h | 2 +- > > This would deserve new tests that cover the existing use cases, > given that both of us (and other reviewers in the original thread) > did not notice how big a regression we are causing. Yep, it's too easy to break undocumented and untested behavior. > We care about --cc naturally falling back to -p when there is only > one other thing to compare with, and also we care about --cc that > allows us to compare during conflict resolution, at least, I think. I'm all for more tests, but I'm afraid I'm not in a good position to write them, especially for an undocumented behavior. I think somebody should first document what --cc/-c does in diff-index, and only then it makes sense to write some tests. > It can and should come as a separate step, of course. Unbreaking > gitk for an already known breakage would be more urgent than hunting > for other breakages, even though the latter might result in a more > thorough fix in the end. Makes sense. Thanks, -- Sergey Organov
