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-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.0 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_NONE shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C4791F466 for ; Tue, 4 Feb 2020 04:51:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727084AbgBDEv1 (ORCPT ); Mon, 3 Feb 2020 23:51:27 -0500 Received: from mail-pj1-f68.google.com ([209.85.216.68]:50578 "EHLO mail-pj1-f68.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726992AbgBDEv1 (ORCPT ); Mon, 3 Feb 2020 23:51:27 -0500 Received: by mail-pj1-f68.google.com with SMTP id r67so795684pjb.0 for ; Mon, 03 Feb 2020 20:51:26 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ttaylorr-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to :user-agent; bh=4AUMJ69KSKwu/KIkPBan4RIpJHhwi7kAYwFAkrjvCis=; b=TtcKMLw63ZXmN+SY+GE5MzyJh6zWRbtx1fqGiUTQ5cSe7gIZxnXWWmdBhCcAKkDAQQ Hz8nw/eiZrk0uXDJDi1fd7pRWNOKNS4oNX8HlqKsIuOrBgmhHF0BbxbOYdtNFQM6yIKt O2CkFVxH/X3JI4lrAmq7/IdQLGEkX87f6XmiVgm6JZKO+yUw1iE9Qs4eWfCVfzK2h5Sc 6MOJ0dA89a8bQwe/GEt6SAM8tude+rr+VyU7xuc0KjRYZ+r8HpPmolfCmkJiPhQZqj2F JdjOKlVsrN0o+CUmfj7xIlHRN2zxL3stBcxwSVln5rslTCrfPB7+s6NbTHh7rHwAfAld bRLw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding :in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=4AUMJ69KSKwu/KIkPBan4RIpJHhwi7kAYwFAkrjvCis=; b=uHaMaMp3rfg+3VjjTJ62AWnGnE9bHsu8ZEfJhwytOCOK9jnkHozWt9zLt3LKQKNQcn dMGiAEvvYBW8KETNgQNA6YyoWI5qk4ulXsOQ4B6DLuBTctNSt2Hdhj/kgBdu1yFVBq6b 7F9PfAC24RrnVDY0NzUwV7kFqD6OGRSDg5zquBB+wvlupyKgwEz/zjhvVVaCATPtzdpE FTUv0qYxuG6xw1qmJimr2xDSezYvw3zPJH1X2j7f0BIKTVOAafIxN8fbCDSSJx7djcT7 DZTIhyKuBNErTnhU3grDqK49jHn/KdtMKBqd4agTPZAwsxHrUr+Ab0MG8/GxY3JI4u8s yqvA== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAWa+oTKSJT+Z82FyDKx3I9y+Tq+vW5Y/4Is+IeOCiQfsSvCr10p pCDwl7jjLsNZNjZcExWeZQ+CF0kRDppTuw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxxxgNCGAZyYOEQluumJxiJ8IGHYzT2P7Hi7v3dAGxWaRSk6fhKtWUwz5rWhIvaHGUFvM5M2w== X-Received: by 2002:a17:90b:11cd:: with SMTP id gv13mr3743775pjb.94.1580791886054; Mon, 03 Feb 2020 20:51:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost ([2601:602:9200:32b0:7c5e:a7ec:bd9e:cd59]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id b1sm22814276pfp.44.2020.02.03.20.51.24 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 03 Feb 2020 20:51:25 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2020 20:51:24 -0800 From: Taylor Blau To: Martin =?utf-8?B?w4VncmVu?= Cc: Taylor Blau , Git Mailing List , Jeff King , Derrick Stolee , Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] builtin/commit-graph.c: introduce '--input=' Message-ID: <20200204045124.GG5790@syl.local> References: <8effe35bcd1dadee3a29d996f269353cf6e4982d.1580430057.git.me@ttaylorr.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.11.4 (2019-03-13) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Jan 31, 2020 at 08:34:41PM +0100, Martin Ågren wrote: > On Fri, 31 Jan 2020 at 01:30, Taylor Blau wrote: > > The 'write' mode of the 'commit-graph' supports input from a number of > > different sources: pack indexes over stdin, commits over stdin, commits > > reachable from all references, and so on. Each of these options are > > specified with a unique option: '--stdin-packs', '--stdin-commits', etc. > > > > Similar to our replacement of 'git config [--]' with 'git config > > [--type=]' (c.f., fb0dc3bac1 (builtin/config.c: support > > `--type=` as preferred alias for `--`, 2018-04-18)), softly > > deprecate '[--]' in favor of '[--input=]'. > > > > This makes it more clear to implement new options that are combinations > > of other options (such as, for example, "none", a combination of the old > > "--append" and a new sentinel to specify to _not_ look in other packs, > > which we will implement in a future patch). > > Makes sense. > > > Unfortunately, the new enumerated type is a bitfield, even though it > > makes much more sense as '0, 1, 2, ...'. Even though *almost* all > > options are pairwise exclusive, '--stdin-{packs,commits}' *is* > > compatible with '--append'. For this reason, use a bitfield. > > > -With the `--append` option, include all commits that are present in the > > -existing commit-graph file. > > +With the `--input=append` option, include all commits that are present > > +in the existing commit-graph file. > > Would it be too crazy to call this `--input=existing` instead, and have > it be the same as `--append`? I find that `--append` makes a lot of > sense (it's a mode we can turn on or off), whereas "input = append" > seems more odd. Hmm. When I wrote this, I was thinking of introducing equivalent options that are identical in name and functionality as '--input=' instead of '--'. So, I guess that is to say that I didn't spend an awful amount of time thinking about whether or not '--input=append' made sense given anything else. So, I don't think that '--input=existing' is a bad idea at all, but I do worry about advertising this deprecation as "'--' becomes '--input=', except when your mode is 'append', in which case it becomes '--input=existing'". I suppose that, on the other hand, if we *were* to introduce such a change, now would be the time to do it, before '--input=' is on master and tagged in a release, but I'm not sure that '--input=append' is so much worse. I'm inclined to leave it as is, unless there are others that feel strongly, in which case we can/should come back to it before this moves towards being queued. > >From the next commit message, we learn that a long `--input=append` > triggers `fill_oids_from_all_packs()`, which wouldn't match my expecting > from "--input=existing". So... > > Does this hint that we could leave `--append` alone? We'd have lots of > different inputs to choose from using `--input`, and an `--append` mode > on top of that. That would make your inputs truly mutually exclusive and > you don't need the bitfield anymore, as you mention above. Hmm? > > Would that mean that the falling back to `fill_oids_from_all_packs()` > would follow from "is there an --input?", as opposed to from "is there > an --input except --input=append?"? > > (I don't know whether these inputs really *have* to be exclusive, or if > that's more of an implementation detail. That is, even without an > "append" input, might we one day be able to handle more inputs at once? > Maybe this is not the time to worry about that.) > > Martin Thanks, Taylor