Web lists-archives.com

Re: [RFC PATCH 1/1] filter-options: Expand abbreviated numbers

Josh Steadmon <steadmon@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:

>> > -	`rev-list` for possible "filter-spec" values.
>> > +	`rev-list` for possible "filter-spec" values. Clients MUST
>> > +	translate abbreviated numbers (e.g. "1k") into fully-expanded
>> > +	numbers (e.g. "1024") on the client side, so that the server
>> > +	does not need to implement unit parsing.
>> I suspect that it is too late now to retroactively say "MUST" here.
>> The best we may be able to do is to say "The sender SHOULD send a
>> plain integer without unit and the receiver SHOULD be prepared to
>> scale an integer with unit".
> In that case, do you think we should also specify that units should be
> interpreted as powers-of-2 rather than powers-of-10?

If we do not document the number scaling elsewhere, then we
certainly should, but I somehow doubt it.

Documentation/git-config.txt does list these explicitly where it
talks about --type=int, but these human-readable scaled integers are
also used in command line arguments as well, so we may want to find
a central place that is clear to the readers that the description
applies to all of them and move the description there.