William Hubbs <willi...@gentoo.org> writes:

> diff --git a/cache.h b/cache.h
> index 009e8b3b15..375be1f68b 100644
> --- a/cache.h
> +++ b/cache.h
> @@ -1494,10 +1494,19 @@ int date_overflows(timestamp_t date);
>  #define IDENT_STRICT        1
>  #define IDENT_NO_DATE               2
>  #define IDENT_NO_NAME               4
> +
> +enum want_ident {
> +     WANT_BLANK_IDENT,
> +     WANT_AUTHOR_IDENT,
> +     WANT_COMMITTER_IDENT,

I do not recall we crossed the bridge to allow trailing comma here
at the end of enum definition.

> +};


> +extern const char *fmt_ident(const char *name, const char *email,
> +             enum want_ident whose_ident,
> +             const char *date_str, int);
> +extern const char *fmt_name(enum want_ident);

Nice interface.

> diff --git a/config.c b/config.c
> index ff521eb27a..4bd5920dea 100644
> --- a/config.c
> +++ b/config.c
> @@ -1484,6 +1484,12 @@ int git_default_config(const char *var, const char 
> *value, void *cb)
>               return 0;
>       }
>  
> +     if (starts_with(var, "author."))
> +             return git_ident_config(var, value, cb);
> +
> +     if (starts_with(var, "committer."))
> +             return git_ident_config(var, value, cb);
> +

I'd rather see this done close to where "user." is already handled,
perhaps like

        -       if (starts_with(var, "user."))
        +       if (starts_with(var, "user.") ||
        +           starts_with(var, "author.") ||
        +           starts_with(var, "committer."))
                        return git_ident_config(...);

> -int git_ident_config(const char *var, const char *value, void *data)
> +static int set_ident(const char *var, const char *value)
>  {
> -     if (!strcmp(var, "user.useconfigonly")) {
> -             ident_use_config_only = git_config_bool(var, value);
> +     if (!strcmp(var, "author.name")) {
> +             if (!value)
> +                     return config_error_nonbool(var);
> +             strbuf_reset(&git_author_name);
> +             strbuf_addstr(&git_author_name, value);
> +             author_ident_explicitly_given |= IDENT_NAME_GIVEN;
> +             ident_config_given |= IDENT_NAME_GIVEN;
> +             return 0;
> +     }
> +
> +     if (!strcmp(var, "author.email")) {
> +             if (!value)
> +                     return config_error_nonbool(var);
> +             strbuf_reset(&git_author_email);
> +             strbuf_addstr(&git_author_email, value);
> +             author_ident_explicitly_given |= IDENT_MAIL_GIVEN;
> +             ident_config_given |= IDENT_MAIL_GIVEN;
> +             return 0;
> +     }
> +
> +     if (!strcmp(var, "committer.name")) {
> +             if (!value)
> +                     return config_error_nonbool(var);
> +             strbuf_reset(&git_committer_name);
> +             strbuf_addstr(&git_committer_name, value);
> +             committer_ident_explicitly_given |= IDENT_NAME_GIVEN;
> +             ident_config_given |= IDENT_NAME_GIVEN;
> +             return 0;
> +     }
> +
> +     if (!strcmp(var, "committer.email")) {
> +             if (!value)
> +                     return config_error_nonbool(var);
> +             strbuf_reset(&git_committer_email);
> +             strbuf_addstr(&git_committer_email, value);
> +             committer_ident_explicitly_given |= IDENT_MAIL_GIVEN;
> +             ident_config_given |= IDENT_MAIL_GIVEN;
>               return 0;

So, when we see "committer.phone", git_default_config() would call
git_ident_config() which in turn would call this, and the unknown
variable is silently ignored, which is good.

> diff --git a/log-tree.c b/log-tree.c
> index 3cb14256ec..1e56df62a7 100644
> --- a/log-tree.c
> +++ b/log-tree.c
> @@ -687,8 +687,7 @@ void show_log(struct rev_info *opt)
>        */
>       if (ctx.need_8bit_cte >= 0 && opt->add_signoff)
>               ctx.need_8bit_cte =
> -                     has_non_ascii(fmt_name(getenv("GIT_COMMITTER_NAME"),
> -                                            getenv("GIT_COMMITTER_EMAIL")));
> +                     has_non_ascii(fmt_name(WANT_COMMITTER_IDENT));

Very nice.

Reply via email to