From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id F34861F404 for ; Sat, 24 Mar 2018 19:33:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752781AbeCXTd5 (ORCPT ); Sat, 24 Mar 2018 15:33:57 -0400 Received: from mail-pl0-f46.google.com ([209.85.160.46]:46362 "EHLO mail-pl0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752633AbeCXTd5 (ORCPT ); Sat, 24 Mar 2018 15:33:57 -0400 Received: by mail-pl0-f46.google.com with SMTP id f5-v6so9432628plj.13 for ; Sat, 24 Mar 2018 12:33:56 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=message-id:to:cc:in-reply-to:from:date:subject:references; bh=mYbMWakGX6dRzAxZgntCP9G6b+vtQgfU8f8TcI9K1lY=; b=q1/K8tcEeKub3IyuUIz068EAoPBy1hr9s3fQ+Pubn+lvkiDiAR5I0YZdrrZIqEJUnM 7fBs6znGhj5KMakgwI42wIPY5uwf5HAY6zJFegcHIXGLDyYUOoqLkWj84+jOwDANdjMJ FxeWXXKgj7gG31qKKcV1AKA8vqmWLWk/vNlWY2l3W2UD4C1wu+EFNECZr3STEJQ/B9aA foZc4Z34OTSYGb7xgsIqaPN8S5S7hgQZydYiZwB2xVEntjFCG59LafXTU8nu1XfARDcO jQxV5GtcHXAilnzrqcprokaxfkIdEWg7/Hi8eOy6RaKo5oGIk6TqhHW/CLuWccCsTUvv psqQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:to:cc:in-reply-to:from:date:subject :references; bh=mYbMWakGX6dRzAxZgntCP9G6b+vtQgfU8f8TcI9K1lY=; b=qxWtk05gWNCRumXoTA/CX3IraAIzeaEC9OKXh9bdC4Fw10CuvisXUvOcvd0pSlhy6l g4Ag6LVMRhX9PqGnFVBoJzqzF6cnncpyOw60hq8CWWBhiW4Vr79spK05xfBlhDtzuh9l hnS7L/BSoogDvIpd9/cgc85WmVIZ8wJRcMrVItvowqMklaxCKSNx0KwlLT7e3PuI13gc 3b0DyjPavm2TPXHYyQxMv+D1wBrwzd59icfb+xtRL2Ff/MkdzIXezWQ5nnx/uTxsiTPH 5JQYGIuHQMfRdlFUBTA1Sc+MRiN8HBRbdr2KGOiSnSnJWImh8hRQsP31RedyjXM+edof RFUA== X-Gm-Message-State: AElRT7HYZ1uAsbqek8wFSmb7bJ67JO3/Evlwfuxz+n+lAzn+WGxw5KGg tMsPv/FiTiuH+vNLbUSop0E= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AG47ELvWDK8mxsIc4g5LrizbGvk7t00tWW6RPw4U6Ql11lLdDVhGlovHD7p9KxF38mfTLk+VAgrH5g== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:1e5:: with SMTP id b92-v6mr22861994plb.78.1521920036449; Sat, 24 Mar 2018 12:33:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (softbank126094196092.bbtec.net. [126.94.196.92]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id e125sm21693674pgc.76.2018.03.24.12.33.54 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Sat, 24 Mar 2018 12:33:55 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <5ab6a823.8369630a.f525.c93a@mx.google.com> To: Junio C Hamano CC: git@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: From: Yuki Kokubun Date: Sat, 24 Mar 2018 19:29:53 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH] filter-branch: consider refs can refer to an object other than commit or tag References: <5ab46520.0352650a.cc02b.a177@mx.google.com> <20180323050913.5188-1-orga.chem.job@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org >> "git filter-branch -- --all" print unwanted error messages when refs that >> cannot be used with ^0 exist. > > It is not incorrect per-se, but if I were writing this, I'd say > "... when refs that point at objects that are not committish" or > something like that, as that is much closer to people (both end > users and Git developers) than the "^0" implementation detail. I agree that readability to users is important than the implementation detail. So, I'm gonna change the commit message. >> Such refs can be created by "git replace" with >> trees or blobs. Also, "git tag" with trees or blobs can create such refs. > > Taking two paragraphs above together, you wrote an excellent > description of the problem to be solved (i.e. what would be seen by > users and under what condition the symptom would trigger). If there > is a single obvious solution that would trivially follow from the > problem description, it is perfectly fine to stop here. Otherwise, > it would help to describe how it is solved next. Something as brief > like > > Filter these problematic refs out early, and warn that these > refs are left unwritten while doing so. > > would suffice in this case, I think. We _could_ insert > > before they are seen by the logic to see which refs have > been modified and which have been left intact (which is > where the unwanted error messages come from), > > between "early," and "and warn", if we wanted to. I think the detailed description is better than the shorter one in this case. So I'm gonna follow to detailed one.