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=-3.9 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,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 1E18F1F8C6 for ; Sat, 28 Aug 2021 01:51:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S233034AbhH1Bvu (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 Aug 2021 21:51:50 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp21.pobox.com ([173.228.157.53]:62936 "EHLO pb-smtp21.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S232953AbhH1Bvu (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 Aug 2021 21:51:50 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp21.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6225113843B; Fri, 27 Aug 2021 21:51:00 -0400 (EDT) (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=/sDJRyIZ3LAX wW6P91mrGvZepxQCzqbWEYdFUhDvzjY=; b=pikBSXZaIWonbUwiYmDlnuh2Gtjm dgKBZOpgAB3vQMzOWGu/20adVrgXnhZmSKkQVlFnQVZiTSx4Uaysm+97OKBa8R1N ociM5lodvzXZTtNDGr6LKixfcqIA3vQpoXmUOK3hKtG+q+s3E4IGAUFXobCKEwv/ l7GjbUsOMbdDfQw= Received: from pb-smtp21.sea.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 59D4213843A; Fri, 27 Aug 2021 21:51:00 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.74.116.162]) (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 A44BD138437; Fri, 27 Aug 2021 21:50:57 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: =?utf-8?B?w4Z2YXIgQXJuZmrDtnLDsA==?= Bjarmason Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Emily Shaffer , Derrick Stolee Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 4/5] index-pack: add --progress-title option References: Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2021 18:50:56 -0700 In-Reply-To: (=?utf-8?B?IsOGdmFyIEFybmZqw7Zyw7A=?= Bjarmason"'s message of "Thu, 26 Aug 2021 16:05:50 +0200") 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: 637CC536-07A2-11EC-B824-9BA3EF469F85-77302942!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: > Since the option is internal-only the inconsistency shouldn't > matter. OK. > I'm copying the pattern to handle it as-is from the handling > of the existing "-o" option in the same function, see 9cf6d3357aa (Add > git-index-pack utility, 2005-10-12) for its addition. That is apples-to-oranges comparison, as the original is not even a long option so it won't be -o=3Dfilename anyway. So the "i+1" (as opposed to "i + 1") loses justification. Since the option is implementation detail, having to spell its value separately is OK, though. > Eventually we'd like to migrate all of this this to parse_options(), > which would make these differences in behavior go away. Perhaps, but if it does not matter now, it shouldn't be worth code-churn later, either. Thanks.