From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.9 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A, SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4522A1F5AF for ; Tue, 30 Mar 2021 11:43:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S231879AbhC3Lma (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Mar 2021 07:42:30 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:37080 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231574AbhC3Ll6 (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Mar 2021 07:41:58 -0400 Received: from mail-qv1-xf33.google.com (mail-qv1-xf33.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::f33]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E9FC0C061574 for ; Tue, 30 Mar 2021 04:41:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qv1-xf33.google.com with SMTP id o19so7965299qvu.0 for ; Tue, 30 Mar 2021 04:41:57 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=W/Ulw1NZoxjGc5sP1bzg3rPDCYvBuJz5d6/6LhnkqMs=; b=DAWA0xnn2DerFETYyB630b+Co3/WlJHjIMd5ODley/BqePwP1Zea048p7+0PVC50CZ 8fUs+/wShIGiLnx43GtWBoxErbbLgxZnXW4GatfmbmuwzBV5rd074kuS9Y2bYCNLMWAE sljOMz2Adq0OWR8egWMUpvhJodFAx71/jhR6HJJejxM6ISj9uA3VTdhW62mHwgoKL0W2 t6Jri3oeOBswZud/M1HNZjYyp8pNl4VT19cE9iIhX16yHENcUw5WnGi+nUKEYjrGjN4c J1aP8f2vrJH2QsyAutNpMxE3XqzkXDsnb8SvfWBXi6XhanQCOqryRCWeyT6aq0Dce/mf lgfw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=W/Ulw1NZoxjGc5sP1bzg3rPDCYvBuJz5d6/6LhnkqMs=; b=Ko5iOxQynwyFpMQa7+suGWQLRKMflkzU3tuiolD+cAqi8VZAN7bl5p2qt0+hVj7k6c on0gydtfEL66OaLKJ5FJdr78kVGn9fBVpUF9ozdl1oHAw3jCDpGCTPlSIgKr5GSZpGn5 XAZaxVKzjYDnUWbxuoUMxHW1vMZB8rYVmOjd6gvd5VOhyAuJXuCdaDUAO2MlHDQPkaoG 0JfFz9VrcN5+Q4/RbI8nLlR8eZy7zj9GFIw3BSJ8G66PgPFhLvMn7O/IQO52PQUp4FEw S7ZYFrjUW7aixTEbX/nBXORKNcwNoyk0Ya63J8r2jOhxgQzCPCEKl5XmhUap/NSLixjH WhXA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533Krco8DECyDv89YxnqntvrcXH6Emlay2HwvkdG4oAtiU9hNaOt HBCj9IFjOOCxwaeHeaHGKc0= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJw1IJ6Yvpute1oYMCPeWGOyPHXAK52LYT1ovRdKES0R3K4VvIrS3q9o3VAqGgM4FtG8UwF+1Q== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6214:b04:: with SMTP id u4mr29684012qvj.0.1617104516885; Tue, 30 Mar 2021 04:41:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?IPv6:2600:1700:e72:80a0:51d7:1436:793b:b3c9? ([2600:1700:e72:80a0:51d7:1436:793b:b3c9]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id a138sm15394795qkg.29.2021.03.30.04.41.56 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 30 Mar 2021 04:41:56 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 07/20] test-read-cache: print cache entries with --table To: =?UTF-8?B?w4Z2YXIgQXJuZmrDtnLDsCBCamFybWFzb24=?= Cc: Elijah Newren , Derrick Stolee via GitGitGadget , Git Mailing List , Junio C Hamano , =?UTF-8?B?Tmd1eeG7hW4gVGjDoWkgTmfhu41j?= , Jonathan Nieder , =?UTF-8?Q?Martin_=c3=85gren?= , =?UTF-8?Q?SZEDER_G=c3=a1bor?= , Derrick Stolee , Derrick Stolee References: <7ebd9570b1ad81720569a770526651c62c152b9f.1616507069.git.gitgitgadget@gmail.com> <87r1k5pcmx.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com> <874kgzq4qi.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com> <87eeg0ng78.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com> <87im59mufk.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com> From: Derrick Stolee Message-ID: <60e27a5c-b3d1-4a6a-51d5-bdc03591e02d@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2021 07:41:54 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.9.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <87im59mufk.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On 3/29/2021 7:06 PM, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 29 2021, Derrick Stolee wrote: > >> On 3/28/2021 11:31 AM, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:> It seems to me that the reason for that state is based on a >>> misunderstanding about what we would and wouldn't add to builtin/*.c, >>> i.e. that we wouldn't have something like a --debug option, but as >>> ls-files shows that's not a problem. > > At the risk of going in circles here... > >> I feel _strongly_ that a change to the user-facing CLI should come >> with a good reason and care about how it locks-in behavior for the >> future. > > And I agree with you. Where we disagree is whether lives in builtin/*.c > == user-facing. I think --debug options are != that. It seems Junio > downthread agrees with that. > >> Any adjustment to 'git ls-files' deserves its own series and >> attention[...] > > A user-facing change to it yes, but I don't see how use of an (existing > even) --debug option would warrant any more attention than a new test > helper, less actually, it's less new code. I disagree that we can change the expected output of --debug so quickly, despite warnings in the documentation. Changing that format or creating a new output format requires cognitive load, and we have enough of that going on in this area as it is. >> [...] not in an already-too-large series like this one. ... > I'm just still perplexed at how you keep bringing up use of an > internal-only --debug option as "user-facing", and here "already too > large" when we're talking about a proposed alternate direction that > would reduce the size. I'm not saying "patch size" or "code size" but instead thinking of it in terms of how many decisions need to be made. Changing a builtin when it's not necessary adds to the complexity of the series and interrupts its core goals. Finally, I have mentioned that I will need extra data for testing a new index format. I don't want to modify the builtin now in a way that is insufficient for the needs in that future series. > Just to clarify, upthread in [1] you said: > > And I recommend that you continue to pursue [these RFC patches] as > an independent series, but I'm not going to incorporate them into > this one[...] > > So do I understand it right that you're referring to phase IV in your > opinion being the first point where we'd consider piggy-backing on > anything in builtin (that "user-facing" dilemma again...). I'm saying that if you feel strongly about it, then please pursue the changes to ls-files any time after this series (but probably after the next) solidifies. Having the changes be in a separate series allows time to inspect the behavior change to the builtin in a focused way. > But at that point wouldn't you have your own ideas about some > user-facing ls-files or other porcelain for this, so I'm not sure where > to place the encouragement that I continue to pursue that RFC series, > other than setting a reminder in my calendar for 6-12 months in the > future :) Otherwise, I will modify ls-files myself in this 6-12 month timeframe, based on the established plan to remove the command_requires_full_index setting. Thanks, -Stolee