On 9/18/2021 12:02 PM, Taylor Blau wrote:
> In 84e4484f12 (commit-graph: use parse_options_concat(), 2021-08-23) we
> unified common options of commit-graph's subcommands into a single
> "common_opts" array.
>
> But 84e4484f12 introduced a behavior change which is to accept the
> "--[no-]progress" option before any sub-commands, e.g.,
>
> git commit-graph --progress write ...
>
> Prior to that commit, the above would error out with "unknown option".
>
> There are two issues with this behavior change. First is that the
> top-level --[no-]progress is not always respected. This is because
> isatty(2) is performed in the sub-commands, which unconditionally
> overwrites any --[no-]progress that was given at the top-level.
>
> But the second issue is that the existing sub-commands of commit-graph
> only happen to both have a sensible interpretation of what `--progress`
> or `--no-progress` means. If we ever added a sub-command which didn't
> have a notion of progress, we would be forced to ignore the top-level
> `--[no-]progress` altogether.
>
> Since we haven't released a version of Git that supports --[no-]progress
> as a top-level option for `git commit-graph`, let's remove it.
I agree that is the best way to respond right now. Moving it to
top-level will need more work.
> @@ -50,8 +50,6 @@ static struct option common_opts[] = {
> OPT_STRING(0, "object-dir", &opts.obj_dir,
> N_("dir"),
> N_("the object directory to store the graph")),
> - OPT_BOOL(0, "progress", &opts.progress,
> - N_("force progress reporting")),
> OPT_END()
> };
>
> @@ -95,6 +93,8 @@ static int graph_verify(int argc, const char **argv)
> static struct option builtin_commit_graph_verify_options[] = {
> OPT_BOOL(0, "shallow", &opts.shallow,
> N_("if the commit-graph is split, only verify the tip file")),
> + OPT_BOOL(0, "progress", &opts.progress,
> + N_("force progress reporting")),
> OPT_END(),
> };
> struct option *options = add_common_options(builtin_commit_graph_verify_options);
> @@ -246,6 +246,8 @@ static int graph_write(int argc, const char **argv)
> OPT_CALLBACK_F(0, "max-new-filters", &write_opts.max_new_filters,
> NULL, N_("maximum number of changed-path Bloom filters to compute"),
> 0, write_option_max_new_filters),
> + OPT_BOOL(0, "progress", &opts.progress,
> + N_("force progress reporting")),
> OPT_END(),
Meanwhile this diff is easy to verify.
Thanks,
-Stolee
