From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
To: Santiago Torres <santiago@nyu.edu>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, gitster@pobox.com, sunshine@sunshineco.com,
walters@verbum.org, Lukas Puehringer <luk.puehringer@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 3/7] tag: add format specifier to gpg_verify_tag
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2017 12:25:31 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170117172531.bahjekbj3om43gtq@sigill.intra.peff.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170117165724.2hbyfdzrhrmro54b@LykOS.localdomain>
On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 11:57:25AM -0500, Santiago Torres wrote:
> > Having read through the rest of the series, it looks like you'd
> > sometimes have to do:
>
> IIRC, we did this to make the diff "simpler". It also feeds odd that the
> call chain is the following:
>
> verify_and_format_tag()
> gpg_verify_tag()
> run_gpg_verification()
>
> I'm afraid that adding yet another wrapper would further convolute the
> call chain. If you think this is not an issue, I could easily do it. Do
> you have any suggested name for the wrapper?
Actually, looking at the callsites, I think they are fine to just call
pretty_print_ref() themselves, and I don't think it actually matters if
it happens before or after the verification.
So I think you could just throw out patch 3 entirely and squash these
hunks into patches 4 and 5:
diff --git a/builtin/tag.c b/builtin/tag.c
index 9da11e0c2..fab9fa8f9 100644
--- a/builtin/tag.c
+++ b/builtin/tag.c
@@ -111,10 +111,12 @@ static int verify_tag(const char *name, const char *ref,
char *fmt_pretty = cb_data;
flags = GPG_VERIFY_VERBOSE;
- if (fmt_pretty)
+ if (fmt_pretty) {
flags = GPG_VERIFY_QUIET;
+ pretty_print_ref(name, sha1, fmt_pretty);
+ }
- return verify_and_format_tag(sha1, ref, fmt_pretty, flags);
+ return gpg_verify_tag(sha1, ref, flags);
}
static int do_sign(struct strbuf *buffer)
diff --git a/builtin/verify-tag.c b/builtin/verify-tag.c
index 212449f47..114df1c52 100644
--- a/builtin/verify-tag.c
+++ b/builtin/verify-tag.c
@@ -58,9 +58,15 @@ int cmd_verify_tag(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix)
while (i < argc) {
unsigned char sha1[20];
const char *name = argv[i++];
- if (get_sha1(name, sha1))
+
+ if (get_sha1(name, sha1)) {
had_error = !!error("tag '%s' not found.", name);
- else if (verify_and_format_tag(sha1, name, fmt_pretty, flags))
+ continue;
+ }
+
+ if (fmt_pretty)
+ pretty_print_ref(name, sha1, fmt_pretty);
+ if (gpg_verify_tag(sha1, name, flags))
had_error = 1;
}
return had_error;
You could make the diff in the second one simpler by skipping the
"continue" and just doing the whole thing in an "else" block. But IMHO
the continue-on-error makes the logic more clear.
-Peff
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-01-17 17:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-01-15 18:46 [PATCH v5 0/7] Add --format to tag verification santiago
2017-01-15 18:46 ` [PATCH v5 1/7] gpg-interface, tag: add GPG_VERIFY_QUIET flag santiago
2017-01-15 18:47 ` [PATCH v5 2/7] ref-filter: add function to print single ref_array_item santiago
2017-01-15 18:47 ` [PATCH v5 3/7] tag: add format specifier to gpg_verify_tag santiago
2017-01-17 15:24 ` Jeff King
2017-01-17 15:30 ` Jeff King
2017-01-17 16:57 ` Santiago Torres
2017-01-17 17:25 ` Jeff King [this message]
2017-01-17 17:30 ` Jeff King
2017-01-17 17:33 ` Santiago Torres
2017-01-17 17:34 ` Jeff King
2017-01-15 18:47 ` [PATCH v5 4/7] builtin/verify-tag: add --format to verify-tag santiago
2017-01-15 18:47 ` [PATCH v5 5/7] builtin/tag: add --format argument for tag -v santiago
2017-01-17 15:34 ` Jeff King
2017-01-17 17:00 ` Santiago Torres
2017-01-17 17:32 ` Jeff King
2017-01-17 17:34 ` Santiago Torres
2017-01-15 18:47 ` [PATCH v5 6/7] t/t7030-verify-tag: Add --format specifier tests santiago
2017-01-15 18:47 ` [PATCH v5 7/7] t/t7004-tag: " santiago
2017-01-17 15:35 ` Jeff King
2017-01-17 15:36 ` [PATCH v5 0/7] Add --format to tag verification Jeff King
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20170117172531.bahjekbj3om43gtq@sigill.intra.peff.net \
--to=peff@peff.net \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=luk.puehringer@gmail.com \
--cc=santiago@nyu.edu \
--cc=sunshine@sunshineco.com \
--cc=walters@verbum.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://80x24.org/mirrors/git.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).