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=-5.6 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI, RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham 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 5C2BA2042F for ; Wed, 16 Nov 2016 18:29:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753140AbcKPS3z (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Nov 2016 13:29:55 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com ([64.147.108.71]:53037 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752278AbcKPS3y (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Nov 2016 13:29:54 -0500 Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 74D1B4DB8A; Wed, 16 Nov 2016 13:29:53 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=f99qvijrMVhcmdr1SBY4G3dKPPI=; b=S+nTnM 5lsbm8vEgJx3KSZuXpDpU8/PqchQ+C4RUZEF2+k6TqAXkRsYyd7gQCiCr0qOa/NG wjGQHEZEz9lMy0BZ5IB2cVFZX7a3eNlzCsZGyeCIv60Qu3Js4CjZIttcM1Er8g2B qjL7XTOBwRnzTwDXm3v31/sCNpsnaq8vyEKCY= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=vZx2MeeBzG1z7/Gyodmr6x/m3NY1WiKa SR79dCHittQRfNqEz+zVPCP4bi16wukLBO0PWpgpcAporkFplxSxZYC2aUEIr97P ACbFVMOUcLcMCvJmpbTmwMXPmMOR38k8NpDJymuwl1AmUGpAWgDiC6QPaVwcImXu hNmOVAp4Ge4= Received: from pb-smtp2.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B52B4DB88; Wed, 16 Nov 2016 13:29:53 -0500 (EST) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [104.132.0.95]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E49484DB87; Wed, 16 Nov 2016 13:29:52 -0500 (EST) From: Junio C Hamano To: Johannes Schindelin Cc: Michael J Gruber , Jacob Keller , Dennis Kaarsemaker , Git mailing list Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH 0/2] git diff <(command1) <(command2) References: <20161111201958.2175-1-dennis@kaarsemaker.net> <0c39be16-76f8-0800-41a2-b7b1dccdd652@drmicha.warpmail.net> Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2016 10:29:51 -0800 In-Reply-To: (Johannes Schindelin's message of "Wed, 16 Nov 2016 10:50:30 +0100 (CET)") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: AA7AAC06-AC2A-11E6-8726-3AB77A1B28F4-77302942!pb-smtp2.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Johannes Schindelin writes: > On Mon, 14 Nov 2016, Junio C Hamano wrote: > >> I _think_ the no-index mode was primarily for those who want to use >> our diff as a replacement for GNU and other diffs, and from that >> point of view, I'd favour not doing the "comparing symbolic link? >> We'll show the difference between the link contents, not target" >> under no-index mode myself. > > If I read this correctly,... Now I re-read it and I can see it can be read either way. By "link contents" in "comparing symbolic link? We'll show the difference between the link contents, not target", I meant the result you get from readlink(2), which will result in diff --git a/RelNotes b/RelNotes index c02235fe8c..b54330f7cd 120000 --- a/RelNotes +++ b/RelNotes @@ -1 +1 @@ -Documentation/RelNotes/2.10.2.txt \ No newline at end of file +Documentation/RelNotes/2.11.0.txt \ No newline at end of file not the comparison between the files that are link targets, i.e. hypothetical diff --git a/RelNotes b/RelNotes index c4d4397023..7a1fce7720 100644 --- a/Documentation/RelNotes/2.10.2.txt +++ b/Documentation/RelNotes/2.11.0.txt @@ -1,41 +1,402 @@ -Git v2.10.2 Release Notes -========================= +Git 2.11 Release Notes ... And I'd favour *NOT* doing that if we are using our diff as a replacement for GNU and other diffs in "no-index" mode. Which leads to ... >> That is a lot closer to the diff other people implemented, not ours. >> Hence the knee-jerk reaction I gave in >> >> http://public-inbox.org/git/xmqqinrt1zcx.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com ... this conclusion, which is consistent with ... > > Let me quote the knee-jerk reaction: > >> My knee-jerk reaction is: >> >> * The --no-index mode should default to your --follow-symlinks >> behaviour, without any option to turn it on or off. ... this one. But notice "I _think_" in the first sentence you quoted. That is a basic assumption that leads to the conclusion, and that assumption is not a fact. Maybe users do *not* want the "no-index" mode as a replacement for GNU and other diffs, in which case comparing the result of readlink(2) even in no-index mode might have merit. I just didn't think it was the case.