Re: [PATCH 1/2] Make git blame's date output format configurable, like git log

On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 3:03 PM, Jeff King [off-list ref] wrote:

On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 02:51:11PM -0800, eletuchy@gmail.com wrote:

quoted

@@ -1975,6 +1975,9 @@ static int git_blame_config(const char *var, const char *value, void *cb)
              blank_boundary = git_config_bool(var, value);
              return 0;
      }
+     if (!strcmp(var, "blame.date") && value[0]) {
+             blame_date_mode = parse_date_format(value);
+     }
      return git_default_config(var, value, cb);
 }

When there is a config value we are expecting to have a value rather
than a boolean, we usually print an error rather than silently
discarding. IOW, something like this:

 if (!strcmp(var, "blame.date")) {
         if (!value)
                 return config_error_nonbool(var);
         blame_date_mode = parse_date_format(value);
 }

I'll make that change to the patch.

quoted

+     switch (blame_date_mode) {
+     case DATE_RFC2822:
+             blame_date_width = sizeof("Thu, 19 Oct 2006 16:00:04 -0700");
+             break;
+     case DATE_ISO8601:
+             blame_date_width = sizeof("2006-10-19 16:00:04 -0700");
+             break;
+     case DATE_SHORT:
+             blame_date_width = sizeof("2006-10-19");
+             break;
+     case DATE_RELATIVE:
+             /* unfortunately "normal" is the fallback for "relative" */
+             /* blame_date_width = sizeof("14 minutes ago"); */
+             /* break; */
+     case DATE_LOCAL:
+     case DATE_NORMAL:
+             blame_date_width = sizeof("Thu Oct 19 16:00:04 2006 -0700");
+             break;
+     }
+     blame_date_width -= 1; /* strip the null */

Maybe this should be a date_format_width() library function?

I think that's a possible change, but unfortunately my next two
patches would not apply cleanly with a date_format_width change.

I'm a n00b with respect to git contribution, but is there a procedure
for pushing my blame_date branch remotely so that it's possible to
track a series of patches?

Other than that, the patch looks reasonable to me.

-Peff

-- 
Eugene