Re: [PATCH] Teach/Fix git-pull/git-merge --quiet and --verbose

On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 2:07 AM, Junio C Hamano [off-list ref] wrote:

"Tuncer Ayaz" [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 9:06 PM, Junio C Hamano [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

"Tuncer Ayaz" [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

Junio, what's the status here? Do you want me to rework it
all with a new verbose/quiet log infrastructure or

Not really.

OK, when do you expect to cut 1.6.0.3? It's so simple
that I'd like to have it included in that revision.

Hmm, I did not think this was a breakage that needs to be fixed on the
maintenance track.  git-pull does not know -q nor -v and teaching these
new options to the command would be a feature enhancement, which by
definition won't be in 1.6.0.3.

It's no breakage as the options did not exist before :-), yes.

quoted

quoted

Using two variables to keep track of what is conceptually a tristate
(quiet, normal and verbose) is insane, and I'd like to see that insanity
fixed first in the patch, regardless of an elaborate "log infrastructure"
you mentioned.

I see what you mean. What about all other modules
with quiet/verbose doing it with two variables?

Are they broken?  If not, let's not touch them.  On the other hand, let's
avoid adding more.

Not really. After I fixed -q in clone/fetch Miklos Vajna came up
with --verbose for clone. I just thought if we come up with a
new way to handle this we should fix it everywhere -v and
-q are available and make it consistent.

quoted

I guess doing it with a single variable in pull first
as an example is what you're after, right?

I did not actually mind the ones in 'git-pull' that much, as eventually
the script will be rewritten in C by somebody anyway.  The patch to
builtin-fetch.c/builtin-merge.c is different, as the repetition of
(verbose || !quiet) was quite noticeable.

I've added -v as it was added to clone in "[PATCH] Implement
git clone -v" and I wanted to be fair to the IDE developers.

Would you prefer to leave -v out?

Why have we gone off-list, by the way?

I was not sure this is of interest to everybody.
We are now on-list again :-).