On Thu, Dec 14, 2023 at 08:49:49AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Patrick Steinhardt <ps@xxxxxx> writes: > > This strongly reminds me of the thread at [1], where a similar issue was > > discussed for git-grep(1). Quoting Junio: > > > >> I actually do not think these "we are allowing Git tools to be used > >> on random garbage" is a good idea to begin with X-<. If we invented > >> something nice for our variant in "git grep" and wish we can use it > >> outside the repository, contributing the feature to implementations > >> of "grep" would have been the right way to move forward, instead of > >> contaminating the codebase with things that are not related to Git. > > > > So this might not be the best way to go. > > That is not a conclusion I want people to draw. > > Like it or not, "git diff --no-index" will be with us to stay, and > "--no-index" being "we have abused the rest of Git code to implement > 'diff' that works _outside_ a Git repository---now go and do your > thing", we would eventually want to correct it, if it is misbehaving > when a repository it finds is in a shape it does not like, no? > > We should have what you quoted in mind as a general principle, and > think twice when we are tempted to hoard useful features for another > tool we initially wrote for Git and allow them to be used with the > "--no-index" option, instead of contributing them to the tool that > does not know or care "git" repositories (like "diff" and "grep"). Okay, thanks for clarifying! Patrick
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
