2018-01-18 1:39 GMT+03:00 Christian Couder <christian.cou...@gmail.com>: > On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 10:43 PM, Jeff King <p...@peff.net> wrote: >> On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 09:55:22AM +0300, Оля Тележная wrote: >> >>> > IOW, the progression I'd expect in a series like this is: >>> > >>> > 1. Teach ref-filter.c to support everything that cat-file can do. >>> > >>> > 2. Convert cat-file to use ref-filter.c. >>> >>> I agree, I even made this and it's working fine: >>> https://github.com/git/git/pull/450/commits/1b74f1047f07434dccb207534d1ad45a143e3f2b > > (Nit: it looks like the above link does not work any more, but it > seems that you are talking about the last patch on the catfile > branch.) > >>> But I decided not to add that to patch because I expand the >>> functionality of several commands (not only cat-file and >>> for-each-ref), and I need to support all new functionality in a proper >>> way, make these error messages, test everything and - the hardest one >>> - support many new commands for cat-file. As I understand, it is not >>> possible unless we finally move to ref-filter and print results also >>> there. Oh, and I also need to rewrite docs in that case. And I decided >>> to apply this in another patch. But, please, say your opinion, maybe >>> we could do that here in some way. >> >> Yeah, I agree that it will cause changes to other users of ref-filter, >> and you'd need to deal with documentation and tests there. But I think >> we're going to have to do those things eventually (since supporting >> those extra fields everywhere is part of the point of the project). And >> by doing them now, I think it can make the transition for cat-file a lot >> simpler, because we never have to puzzle over this intermediate state >> where only some of the atoms are valid for cat-file. > > I agree that you will have to deal with documentation and tests at one > point and that it could be a good idea to do that now. > > I wonder if it is possible to add atoms one by one into ref-filter and > to add tests and documentation at the same time, instead of merging > cat-file atoms with ref-filter atoms in one big step. > > When all the cat-file atoms have been added to ref-filter's > valid_atom, maybe you could add ref-filter's atoms to cat-file's > valid_cat_file_atom one by one and add tests and documentation at the > same time. > > And then when ref-filter's valid_atom and cat-file's > valid_cat_file_atom are identical you can remove cat-file's > valid_cat_file_atom and maybe after that rename "ref-filter" to > "format".
I think it's important to finish migrating process at first. I mean, now we are preparing and collecting everything in ref-filter, but we make resulting string and print still in cat-file. And I am not sure, but maybe it will not be possible to start using new atoms in cat-file while some part of logic still differs. And another thoughts here - we were thinking about creating format.h but decided not to move forward with it, and now we are suffering because of it. Can I create it right now or the history of commits would be too dirty because of it? Also, do you mean just renaming of ref-filter? I was thinking that I need to put formatting-related logic to another file and leave all other stuff in ref-filter. Anyway, your suggested steps looks good, and I am planning to implement them later. Let's discuss, what behavior we are waiting for when atom seems useless for the command. Die or ignore? And, which atoms are useless (as I understand, "rest" and "deltabase" from cat-file are useless for all ref-filter users, so the question is about - am I right in it, and about ref-filter atoms for cat-file). I have never written any tests and docs for Git, I will try to explore by myself how to do that, but if you have any special links/materials about it - please send them to me :) Olga
