From: Sergey Organov <sorganov@gmail.com>
To: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Cc: Glen Choo <chooglen@google.com>, git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: so/diff-merges-more (was Re: What's cooking in git.git (Feb 2023, #01; Thu, 2))
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2023 17:18:56 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <874jqj31gv.fsf@osv.gnss.ru> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <xmqqjzzo46tv.fsf@gitster.g> (Junio C. Hamano's message of "Fri, 10 Mar 2023 13:47:24 -0800")
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes:
> Sergey Organov <sorganov@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> 1. The fact that -m does not imply -p is a mistake. There is no any
>> reasons this exact behavior could be useful. As such, it does not
>> make sense to support this exact behavior in --diff-merges. So the
>> reject of --diff-merges=[no-]hide.
>>
>> 2. This mistake is too dangerous to fix due to subtle compatibility
>> problems, so we can't just fix -m behavior. Thus the reject of my
>> earlier patch "let -m imply -p".
>>
>> 3. Moving behavior change under option is not worth it, as nobody
>> presumably needs this fixed -m behavior anyway (at least among 2
>> persons that are actually opposing the changes). So the reject
>> of "add diffMerges-m-imply-p configuration option" patch.
>>
>> 4. Staring in the face inconsistency between -m and the rest
>> of short diff-merge options is not significant enough to reconsider
>> any of the above rejects.
>
> I do not quite understand the last one (#4),
Well, -m does not imply -p, whereas the rest of diff-merges options
(-c/--cc/--remerge-diff) do imply -p. This is what half of this
lengthy discussion was about.
> own 4., it would be that introducing --diff-merges={kind} may have
> been a mistake. It would have been fine and better to just let
> users choose from whatever set of options we support, i.e. (-c,
> --cc, --remerge-diff, -m -p, -m --raw, ...).
>
> IOW, perhaps deprecate --diff-merges={kind} and eventually remove
> it, if we could.
Why? Unlike -m vs -c they are at least self-consistent and besides allow
to get the output that those short options do not.
> We've been fine without it and we'll be fine without it. Unfortunately
> it may be a bit too late for that, but it certainly is much younger
> than "-m".
I, for one, was never fine with what Git does to show diff for merges.
Then, taking into account that introducing of --diff-merges was not
my idea in the first place, there should be at least two of us here
who were not fine.
It's fine with me that --cc is everything you need, but what I need is
rather diff to the first parent, and I had a hope to finally get -m to
do it, aiming both for consistency and convenience. My 2 attempts
performed in different ways both failed, so, being tired of it likely
even more than you do, I digress.
Thanks,
-- Sergey Organov
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-03-17 14:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-02-03 4:02 What's cooking in git.git (Feb 2023, #01; Thu, 2) Junio C Hamano
2023-02-04 9:33 ` Sergey Organov
2023-02-06 18:35 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-02-06 21:35 ` Sergey Organov
2023-03-01 18:40 ` Sergey Organov
2023-03-01 22:15 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-03-01 22:26 ` Sergey Organov
2023-03-01 23:54 ` Glen Choo
2023-03-02 14:38 ` Sergey Organov
2023-02-07 4:06 ` so/diff-merges-more (was Re: What's cooking in git.git (Feb 2023, #01; Thu, 2)) Glen Choo
2023-02-07 12:50 ` Sergey Organov
2023-03-02 0:37 ` Glen Choo
2023-03-02 16:15 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-03-02 16:57 ` Sergey Organov
2023-03-06 22:22 ` Glen Choo
2023-03-07 10:02 ` Sergey Organov
2023-03-07 17:54 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-03-08 22:19 ` Sergey Organov
2023-03-08 23:08 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-03-09 13:54 ` Sergey Organov
2023-03-09 17:43 ` Glen Choo
2023-03-09 19:56 ` Sergey Organov
2023-03-10 21:19 ` Glen Choo
2023-03-10 21:47 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-03-17 14:18 ` Sergey Organov [this message]
2023-03-18 0:08 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-03-25 16:55 ` Sergey Organov
2023-03-29 7:43 ` Sergey Organov
2023-03-29 8:06 ` Sergey Organov
2023-02-08 17:22 ` ds/bundle-uri-5 (was: " Victoria Dye
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=874jqj31gv.fsf@osv.gnss.ru \
--to=sorganov@gmail.com \
--cc=chooglen@google.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
/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).