git@vger.kernel.org list mirror (unofficial, one of many)
 help / color / mirror / code / Atom feed
From: "Raymond E. Pasco" <ray@ameretat.dev>
To: <phillip.wood@dunelm.org.uk>, "Junio C Hamano" <gitster@pobox.com>
Cc: <git@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/3] apply: make i-t-a entries never match worktree
Date: Sat, 08 Aug 2020 10:07:33 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <C4RO9JSUGPKG.2UQX61X628B6P@ziyou.local> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <db1c56f6-bcd2-bbd9-aa63-70d54215cd44@gmail.com>

On Sat Aug 8, 2020 at 9:46 AM EDT, Phillip Wood wrote:
> > By definition, an intent-to-add index entry can never match the
> > worktree, because worktrees have no concept of intent-to-add entries.
> > Therefore, "apply --index" should always fail on intent-to-add paths.
>
> I'm not sure I understand the logic for this. If I run 'git add -N
> <path>' and <path> does not exist in the worktree what's the reason to
> stop a patch that creates <path> from applying?

"apply --index" requires the index and worktree to match, and applies
the same path to both to get the same result in both. I brainstormed the
logic a few emails upthread, and that's what's consistent with
everything else.

> I was relieved to see from the next patch that this does not affect
> --cached even though the documentation says it implies --index. It might
> be worth mentioning that in the commit message. Also it would be easier
> to follow if the tests were in the same patch (this is what we usually
> do).

--cached doesn't really imply --index - the docs are wrong and should be
changed. If anything, --index is closer to implying --cached - but
really, [no flags], --cached, and --index are three different modes with
different behavior. (Just removing "this implies --index" would be
sufficient to make the docs correct.)

> How this does it affect --check? `git add -p` uses --check to verify
> that hunks that the user has edited still apply. It does not let the
> user edit the hunk for a newly added file at the moment but that is
> something I'm thinking of adding.

--check goes through all the same code, it just doesn't actually touch
anything in the index or worktree. Splittable/editable new file patches
are a logical related feature, IMO. (This is just to squash an error
that shouldn't happen.)

  reply	other threads:[~2020-08-08 14:41 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 53+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-08-04 16:33 [PATCH] apply: Allow "new file" patches on i-t-a entries Raymond E. Pasco
2020-08-04 19:30 ` Junio C Hamano
2020-08-04 20:59   ` Raymond E. Pasco
2020-08-04 22:31   ` [PATCH v2] apply: allow " Raymond E. Pasco
2020-08-04 23:40     ` [PATCH v3] " Raymond E. Pasco
2020-08-04 23:49     ` [PATCH v2] " Junio C Hamano
2020-08-05  0:32       ` Raymond E. Pasco
2020-08-06  6:01         ` [PATCH v4 0/3] apply: handle i-t-a entries in index Raymond E. Pasco
2020-08-06  6:01           ` [PATCH v4 1/3] apply: allow "new file" patches on i-t-a entries Raymond E. Pasco
2020-08-06  6:01           ` [PATCH v4 2/3] apply: make i-t-a entries never match worktree Raymond E. Pasco
2020-08-06 21:00             ` Junio C Hamano
2020-08-06 21:47               ` Raymond E. Pasco
2020-08-06  6:01           ` [PATCH v4 3/3] t4140: test apply with i-t-a paths Raymond E. Pasco
2020-08-06 21:07             ` Junio C Hamano
2020-08-07  3:44               ` Raymond E. Pasco
2020-08-08  7:49           ` [PATCH v5 0/3] apply: handle i-t-a entries in index Raymond E. Pasco
2020-08-08  7:49             ` [PATCH v5 1/3] apply: allow "new file" patches on i-t-a entries Raymond E. Pasco
2020-08-08 13:47               ` Phillip Wood
2020-08-08  7:49             ` [PATCH v5 2/3] apply: make i-t-a entries never match worktree Raymond E. Pasco
2020-08-08 13:46               ` Phillip Wood
2020-08-08 14:07                 ` Raymond E. Pasco [this message]
2020-08-08 15:48                   ` Phillip Wood
2020-08-08 15:58                     ` Raymond E. Pasco
2020-08-09 15:25                       ` Phillip Wood
2020-08-09 17:58                       ` Junio C Hamano
2020-08-10 11:03                   ` [PATCH] git-apply.txt: correct description of --cached Raymond E. Pasco
2020-08-10 16:18                     ` Junio C Hamano
2020-08-12 13:32                       ` Phillip Wood
2020-08-12 19:23                         ` Junio C Hamano
2020-08-12 20:52                           ` Raymond E. Pasco
2020-08-12 13:59                       ` Phillip Wood
2020-08-08  7:49             ` [PATCH v5 3/3] t4140: test apply with i-t-a paths Raymond E. Pasco
2020-08-23 15:58               ` Phillip Wood
2020-08-08  7:53           ` [PATCH 1/1] diff-lib: use worktree mode in diffs from i-t-a entries Raymond E. Pasco
2020-08-08  8:48             ` Martin Ågren
2020-08-08 10:46               ` Raymond E. Pasco
2020-08-08 14:21                 ` Martin Ågren
2020-08-09 18:09             ` Junio C Hamano
2020-08-10  8:53             ` [PATCH] t4069: test diff behavior with i-t-a paths Raymond E. Pasco
2020-08-10  8:57               ` [PATCH] diff-lib: use worktree mode in diffs from i-t-a entries Raymond E. Pasco
2020-08-10  9:03               ` [RESEND PATCH v2] " Raymond E. Pasco
2020-08-10 16:22               ` [PATCH] t4069: test diff behavior with i-t-a paths Junio C Hamano
2020-08-10 16:23               ` Eric Sunshine
2020-08-10 21:47                 ` Eric Sunshine
2020-08-10 22:09                   ` Junio C Hamano
2020-08-10 22:13                     ` Eric Sunshine
2020-08-10 22:22                       ` Junio C Hamano
2020-08-10 23:02                 ` Raymond E. Pasco
2020-08-10 23:21                   ` Eric Sunshine
2020-08-11  3:29                     ` Junio C Hamano
2020-08-08  7:58           ` [HYPOTHETICAL PATCH 0/2] apply: reject modification diffs to i-t-a entries Raymond E. Pasco
2020-08-08  7:58             ` [HYPOTHETICAL PATCH 1/2] " Raymond E. Pasco
2020-08-08  7:58             ` [HYPOTHETICAL PATCH 2/2] t4140: test failure of diff from empty blob to i-t-a path Raymond E. Pasco

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=C4RO9JSUGPKG.2UQX61X628B6P@ziyou.local \
    --to=ray@ameretat.dev \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=gitster@pobox.com \
    --cc=phillip.wood@dunelm.org.uk \
    --subject='Re: [PATCH v5 2/3] apply: make i-t-a entries never match worktree' \
    /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

Code repositories for project(s) associated with this 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).