From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jens Lehmann Subject: Re: What's cooking in git.git (Oct 2013, #02; Mon, 14) Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2013 21:42:14 +0200 Message-ID: <525D9A96.6050209@web.de> References: <20131014184524.GW9464@google.com> <20131015001231.GA9464@google.com> <20131015191656.GD9464@google.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Anders Kaseorg To: Jonathan Nieder , Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Oct 15 21:42:27 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1VWAVd-0002JL-Pp for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Tue, 15 Oct 2013 21:42:26 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759563Ab3JOTmU (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Oct 2013 15:42:20 -0400 Received: from mout.web.de ([212.227.15.4]:54036 "EHLO mout.web.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1759122Ab3JOTmU (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Oct 2013 15:42:20 -0400 Received: from [192.168.178.41] ([91.3.172.217]) by smtp.web.de (mrweb002) with ESMTPA (Nemesis) id 0LoYJu-1Vz9Od3vaM-00gYJy for ; Tue, 15 Oct 2013 21:42:18 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686 on x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.0.1 In-Reply-To: <20131015191656.GD9464@google.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.2 X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:fGePWCKrXNmGZLJHW/HcKDz5Tazehiq9beIIoPhClTRAZteaPOF T47vmwtBqeZPZbnh6VBxvI1rmI2t9bqIxa4XCqa24doHqeiheuAb4EV+JsobF5rOMQSGxpg RZ/mh/m8LXtLOTEtlhw42q4ctunXsTxpjHBGzArHtW4AiWrMPzsQTo6fYrllmE95RggLalM zaQJatyf2l/PLA001xs2A== Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Am 15.10.2013 21:16, schrieb Jonathan Nieder: > So I suspect this will fix more scripts than it breaks, though it may > still break some. :/ Hmm, I'm really not sure if we should do this or not. > It might make sense to warn when passed multiple arguments and some > include shell metacharacters, since that's probably rare, too, except > it's punishing people who use multiple arguments as a way to avoid > quoting issues. Probably there's no replacement for just advertising > the change loudly and seeking out scripts it could break. And maybe only change that on a major version bump where people should not be terribly surprised about such a change in behavior and are more likely to read release notes? I've thought about issuing a warning on certain quoting patterns too, but dismissed that for not helping much in the scripting case. E.g. at $dayjob we have foreach commands running in the shell execution for quite some jobs on our Jenkins server; nobody would see any warnings there until we'd have the reason to dig deeper int the logs because something breaks.