From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS53758 23.128.96.0/24 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.0 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11E7C1F852 for ; Fri, 14 Jan 2022 19:05:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S243873AbiANTFF (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 Jan 2022 14:05:05 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp21.pobox.com ([173.228.157.53]:54429 "EHLO pb-smtp21.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231557AbiANTFF (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 Jan 2022 14:05:05 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp21.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 092DD16842A; Fri, 14 Jan 2022 14:05:05 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=sasl; bh=hol0Go32/rAU pdTrvrCC0VrVfM1PtbWPUbipUrx9OWE=; b=VYUzfV/WhIfS9GSKAVI/wunIcVhr 278LGBW7bnh5J0wHfiSYhM73cgXdLF7aBB44qRqtV2BC/Q/D54Dd4R6LMBxkO0CI pB9B0Kfrxqh5mQstWmrkmnU7KzPKcN5imfsBsk4k67mJ851fd64T5wIjzhhp9FEl TjxovEDHdwV0o3o= Received: from pb-smtp21.sea.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0118D168427; Fri, 14 Jan 2022 14:05:05 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [104.133.2.91]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B3C94168424; Fri, 14 Jan 2022 14:05:01 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: =?utf-8?B?w4Z2YXIgQXJuZmrDtnLDsA==?= Bjarmason Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Jeff King , Bagas Sanjaya , Josh Steadmon Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 4/6] object-name: show date for ambiguous tag objects References: <220114.865yqmtt9z.gmgdl@evledraar.gmail.com> Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2022 11:04:59 -0800 In-Reply-To: <220114.865yqmtt9z.gmgdl@evledraar.gmail.com> (=?utf-8?B?IsOG?= =?utf-8?B?dmFyIEFybmZqw7Zyw7A=?= Bjarmason"'s message of "Fri, 14 Jan 2022 13:05:45 +0100") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 X-Pobox-Relay-ID: E00D5790-756C-11EC-9B61-CBA7845BAAA9-77302942!pb-smtp21.pobox.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org =C3=86var Arnfj=C3=B6r=C3=B0 Bjarmason writes: > I still think the trade-off of not doing that discussed in the commit > message is better, i.e. (to quote upthread): > =20 > We could detect that and emit a "%s [bad tag object]" message (to g= o > with the existing generic "%s [bad object]"), but I don't think it'= s > worth the effort. Users are unlikely to ever run into cases where > they've got a broken object that's also ambiguous, and in case they= do > output that's a bit nonsensical beats wasting translator time on th= is > obscure edge case. Writing the above (and quoting it again to make me respond to it) have already wasted a lot more time than a better solution that does not lead to a misleading output, especially given that it was given for free to you already.