From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tagger id
Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2005 09:04:23 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <m14qb012x4.fsf@ebiederm.dsl.xmission.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7veka48lcw.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> (Junio C. Hamano's message of "Tue, 12 Jul 2005 01:44:15 -0700")
Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net> writes:
> ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) writes:
>
>> Should this default to git_author_ident or git_committer_ident?
>> I'm not really certain how we expect to use the different flavors.
>
> The only in-tree user after your patch is applied is the tagger
> stuff, so in that sense committer_ident may make more sense.
There is also the commit path, and that comes from C. I'm not
quite certain how we should be using the environmental variables.
> Having said that, for something like this that would not be used
> constantly and interatively by the users, my preference is not
> to have any default at all, and always require --author or
> --committer. You have to type a bit more when doing the script,
> but that needs to be done only once. You will be sure which one
> you are asking from the command two weeks after you wrote the
> script so it is not a big loss.
Make sense. Although I'm not quite certain we actually need the
information twice. Possibly we just have GIT_AUTHOR_NAME and
GIT_AUTHOR_EMAIL, and then have commit-write take a flag to
override the author bit. That would certainly make it less
confusing when setting up environmental variables for git.
And that would also give us a better name.
> I am not seriously suggesting the below as an alternative, but
> have you thought about doing an inverse function of your
> computation for the case when the user has all the environment
> variables, and have script eval its output, like this [*1*]:
>
> $ git-id
> GIT_AUTHOR_NAME='Junio C Hamano'
> GIT_AUTHOR_EMAIL='junkio@cox.net'
> GIT_COMMITTER_NAME='Junio C Hamano'
> GIT_COMMITTER_EMAIL='junkio@cox.net'
> $ eval "`git-id`"
> $ tagger="$GIT_COMMITTER_NAME <$GIT_COMMITTER_EMAIL>"
>
> Having names and emails available separately may turn out to be
> easier to use in other situation. Just a thought.
Part of the request was to put all of this information together
in a common place. And note that it is actually:
tagger="$GIT_COMMITTER_NAME <$GIT_COMMITTER_EMAIL> $GIT_COMMITTER_DATE"
Where the date is a human unreadable string of the number of seconds
since the epoch (aka 1 Jan 1970 UTC).
> By the way, I do not particularly like the name "git-id". There
> could be IDs for different kinds (not just people) we would want
> later (file IDs, for example). Naming what you are computing
> _the_ "id" feels a bit too generic. I do not have a better
> alternative to suggest, though.
Agreed. Something like git-author or git-author-stamp is probably
better.
> *1* This makes its output syntax a bit too specific to the shell
> and unfriendly to Porcelain written in other languages. The
> only non-shell Porcelains I am aware of are done in Perl (I do
> not remember hearing its name) and Python (StGIT), both of which
> have reasonable regexp support to grok something like this, so
> it would not be a big issue.
And in git-commit-script this is actually parsed by sed which makes
it so the shell can parse the information as well so I think
we are fine in that sense.
Eric
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-07-12 15:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-07-11 1:18 Trial git RPM's Linus Torvalds
2005-07-11 15:24 ` Eric W. Biederman
2005-07-11 17:06 ` Linus Torvalds
2005-07-11 20:11 ` Horst von Brand
2005-07-11 21:03 ` Chris Wright
2005-07-12 15:59 ` Eric W. Biederman
2005-07-12 17:01 ` Linus Torvalds
2005-07-12 17:14 ` Eric W. Biederman
2005-07-12 17:27 ` Linus Torvalds
2005-07-12 17:46 ` Chris Wright
2005-07-12 0:55 ` Eric W. Biederman
2005-07-12 1:15 ` Linus Torvalds
2005-07-12 2:39 ` Eric W. Biederman
2005-07-12 4:39 ` [PATCH] tagger id Eric W. Biederman
2005-07-12 6:50 ` Eric W. Biederman
2005-07-12 8:44 ` Junio C Hamano
2005-07-12 15:04 ` Eric W. Biederman [this message]
2005-07-12 15:14 ` Petr Baudis
2005-07-12 21:16 ` Junio C Hamano
2005-07-15 0:46 ` Eric W. Biederman
2005-07-12 18:54 ` Linus Torvalds
2005-07-12 22:15 ` Eric W. Biederman
2005-07-12 23:42 ` Junio C Hamano
2005-07-15 0:36 ` Eric W. Biederman
2005-07-12 0:58 ` Trial git RPM's Eric W. Biederman
2005-07-11 20:34 ` Chris Wright
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=m14qb012x4.fsf@ebiederm.dsl.xmission.com \
--to=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=junkio@cox.net \
/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).