Re: [PATCH] notes: Allow treeish expressions as notes ref

Mike Hommey [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

 - Make sure that we show "there is no such tree-ish, no way to look
   up any note to any commit from there" and "I understood the tree
   you gave me, but there is no note for that commit" differently.

How would you reconcile that with the usual "there are only a couple
commits with a note in the hundreds you make me display"?

I am talking about the difference between "a tree exists (which may
lack notes for a given commit)" and "a tree does not even exist in
the first place".  This patch removed "a tree exists but that is not
a ref so we silently ignore", but I do not know if that change alone
covers everything---do you?

quoted

 - Decide if we want to "fail" the operation when the notes tree
   given by the user is not even a tree-ish or just "warn" and keep
   going.  And do so consistently.

Is this something you want to be figured before merging this patch?

Depends on the definition of 'merging'.  I queued this one on 'pu',
and have no intention to merge it down to 'master' by the end of
this month; in the meantime either incremental or replacement
refinement can certainly address that inconsistency I'd hope ;-)

Thanks.