Web lists-archives.com

Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] format-patch: teach format.notes config option




Hi Junio,

On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 11:44:21AM +0900, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Denton Liu <liu.denton@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> 
> > @@ -864,6 +866,20 @@ static int git_format_config(const char *var, const char *value, void *cb)
> >  			from = NULL;
> >  		return 0;
> >  	}
> > +	if (!strcmp(var, "format.notes")) {
> > +		struct strbuf buf = STRBUF_INIT;
> > +
> > +		rev->show_notes = 1;
> > +		if (!strcmp(value, "standard")) {
> > +			rev->notes_opt.use_default_notes = 1;
> > +		} else {
> > +			strbuf_addstr(&buf, value);
> > +			expand_notes_ref(&buf);
> > +			string_list_append(&rev->notes_opt.extra_notes_refs,
> > +					strbuf_detach(&buf, NULL));
> > +		}
> > +		return 0;
> > +	}
> 
> Unlike the command line option parser, this does not seem to touch
> rev->show_notes_given at all.  Intended?  I am wondering how well
> this implementation meshes with what 66b2ed09 ("Fix "log" family not
> to be too agressive about showing notes", 2010-01-20) wanted to do,
> which 894a9d33 ("Support showing notes from more than one notes
> tree", 2010-03-12) later extended.

This was intended but I'm not 100% sure that it's correct.

>From what I could gleam from reading the code, `show_notes_given` is
only used by the `cmd_log_init` function, which is not called by
format-patch. As a result, I opted to not set that flag since it's not
really "given" in the sense that a user didn't explicitly pass in a
command-line option indicating they wanted notes.

> 
> > +test_expect_success 'format-patch notes output control' '
> > +	git notes add -m "notes config message" HEAD &&
> > +	test_when_finished git notes remove HEAD &&
> > +
> > +	git format-patch -1 --stdout >out &&
> > +	! grep "notes config message" out &&
> > +	git format-patch -1 --stdout --notes >out &&
> > +	grep "notes config message" out &&
> > +	git format-patch -1 --stdout --no-notes >out &&
> > +	! grep "notes config message" out &&
> > +	git format-patch -1 --stdout --notes --no-notes >out &&
> > +	! grep "notes config message" out &&
> > +	git format-patch -1 --stdout --no-notes --notes >out &&
> > +	grep "notes config message" out &&
> > +
> > +	test_config format.notes standard &&
> 
> I think we tend to spell these things "default".
> 
> Alternatively, the format.notes configuration can be "bool or text",
> and make the variable set to 'true' mean "show notes, using the
> default ref".

I think I'l go with this approach.

> 
> > +	git format-patch -1 --stdout >out &&
> > +	grep "notes config message" out &&
> > +	git format-patch -1 --stdout --notes >out &&
> > +	grep "notes config message" out &&
> > +	git format-patch -1 --stdout --no-notes >out &&
> > +	! grep "notes config message" out &&
> > +	git format-patch -1 --stdout --notes --no-notes >out &&
> > +	! grep "notes config message" out &&
> > +	git format-patch -1 --stdout --no-notes --notes >out &&
> > +	grep "notes config message" out
> > +'
> 
> OK.
> 
> > +test_expect_success 'format-patch with multiple notes refs' '
> > +	git notes --ref note1 add -m "this is note 1" HEAD &&
> > +	test_when_finished git notes --ref note1 remove HEAD &&
> > +	git notes --ref note2 add -m "this is note 2" HEAD &&
> > +	test_when_finished git notes --ref note2 remove HEAD &&
> > + ...
> > +	git format-patch -1 --stdout --notes=note1 --notes=note2 >out &&
> > +	grep "this is note 1" out &&
> > +	grep "this is note 2" out &&
> 
> Do we promise the order in which these two lines appear in the output?

According to the code, the order is stable. However, I just read through
the documentation and I realised that the ablility to provide multiple
notes refs is undocumented.

In a future reroll, I'll document the fact that --notes can be provided
multiple times.

> 
> > +	test_config format.notes note1 &&
> > +	git format-patch -1 --stdout >out &&
> > +	grep "this is note 1" out &&
> > +	! grep "this is note 2" out &&
> > +	git format-patch -1 --stdout --no-notes >out &&
> > +	! grep "this is note 1" out &&
> > +	! grep "this is note 2" out &&
> > +	git format-patch -1 --stdout --notes=note2 >out &&
> > +	grep "this is note 1" out &&
> > +	grep "this is note 2" out &&
> 
> So format.notes say note1 but the command line explicitly asks it
> wants note from note2, but the command still gives from note1
> anyway.
> 
> > +	git format-patch -1 --stdout --no-notes --notes=note2 >out &&
> > +	! grep "this is note 1" out &&
> > +	grep "this is note 2" out &&
> 
> And there is a way to work it around, i.e. clear everything
> configured with --no-notes and then name the one you want from the
> command line.
> 
> I am not sure if the above is consistent with how our options and
> configurations interact in general.  Shouldn't the --notes=note2
> alone in the earlier example cancel format.notes=note1 configured?

I borrowed this behaviour from how format.to behaves. In format-patch,
`--to` gives a recipient that is used _in addition_ to any format.to
variables. `--no-to` can override this. I made format.notes behave
similarly.

> 
> > +	git config --add format.notes note2 &&
> > +	git format-patch -1 --stdout >out &&
> > +	grep "this is note 1" out &&
> > +	grep "this is note 2" out &&
> > +	git format-patch -1 --stdout --no-notes >out &&
> > +	! grep "this is note 1" out &&
> > +	! grep "this is note 2" out
> > +'
> > +
> >  echo "fatal: --name-only does not make sense" > expect.name-only
> >  echo "fatal: --name-status does not make sense" > expect.name-status
> >  echo "fatal: --check does not make sense" > expect.check