Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] config: add '--show-origin' option to print the origin of a config value

On 13 Feb 2016, at 18:44, Jeff King [off-list ref] wrote:

On Sat, Feb 13, 2016 at 03:24:16PM +0100, larsxschneider@gmail.com wrote:

quoted

From: Lars Schneider <redacted>

If config values are queried using 'git config' (e.g. via --get,
--get-all, --get-regexp, or --list flag) then it is sometimes hard to
find the configuration file where the values were defined.

Teach 'git config' the '--show-origin' option to print the source
configuration file for every printed value.

Thanks, I think this version fixes the correctness issues I mentioned
earlier. I do still have nits to pick (of course :) ), that we may or
may not want to deal with.

quoted

+static void show_config_origin(struct strbuf *buf)
+{
+	const char term = end_null ? '\0' : '\t';
+	const char *type;
+	const char *name;
+
+	current_config_type_name(&type, &name);

This double out-parameter feels like a clunky interface.

I was tempted to suggest that we simply make the "struct config_source"
available to builtin/config.c (which is already pretty intimate with the
rest of the config code), and then it can pick out what it wants. But
there _is_ some logic in the function to convert the NULL "cf" into
"cmdline".

Perhaps it would be simpler to just have two accessor functions, and do:

 strbuf_addstr(buf, current_config_type());
 ...
 strbuf_addstr(buf, current_config_name());

I admit it is a pretty minor point, though.

Agreed, this looks nicer.

quoted

static int show_all_config(const char *key_, const char *value_, void *cb)
{
+	if (show_origin) {
+       struct strbuf buf = STRBUF_INIT;
+       show_config_origin(&buf);
+       fwrite(buf.buf, 1, buf.len, stdout);
+       strbuf_release(&buf);
+	}

The indentation is funky here.

True! Indentation without intention :-) 

The use of fwrite() to catch the embedded NULs is subtle enough that it
might be worth a comment.

It also made me wonder how format_config() handles this. It looks like
we send the result eventually to fwrite() there, so it all works (and it
does _not_ have the comment I mentioned :) ).

I will add a comment in both places :-)

quoted

+test_expect_success '--show-origin' '
+	>.git/config &&
+	>"$HOME"/.gitconfig &&
+	INCLUDE_DIR="$HOME/include" &&
+	mkdir -p "$INCLUDE_DIR" &&
+	cat >"$INCLUDE_DIR"/absolute.include <<-EOF &&
+		[user]
+			absolute = include
+	EOF
+	cat >"$INCLUDE_DIR"/relative.include <<-EOF &&
+		[user]
+			relative = include
+	EOF
+	test_config_global user.global "true" &&
+	test_config_global user.override "global" &&
+	test_config_global include.path "$INCLUDE_DIR"/absolute.include &&
+	test_config include.path ../include/relative.include &&
+	test_config user.local "true" &&
+	test_config user.override "local" &&
+
+	cat >expect <<-EOF &&
+		file:$HOME/.gitconfig	user.global=true
+		file:$HOME/.gitconfig	user.override=global
+		file:$HOME/.gitconfig	include.path=$INCLUDE_DIR/absolute.include
+		file:$INCLUDE_DIR/absolute.include	user.absolute=include
+		file:.git/config	include.path=../include/relative.include
+		file:.git/../include/relative.include	user.relative=include
+		file:.git/config	user.local=true
+		file:.git/config	user.override=local
+		cmdline:	user.cmdline=true
+	EOF
+	git -c user.cmdline=true config --list --show-origin >output &&
+	test_cmp expect output &&
+
+	cat >expect <<-EOF &&
+		file:$HOME/.gitconfigQuser.global
+		trueQfile:$HOME/.gitconfigQuser.override
+		globalQfile:$HOME/.gitconfigQinclude.path
+		$INCLUDE_DIR/absolute.includeQfile:$INCLUDE_DIR/absolute.includeQuser.absolute
+		includeQfile:.git/configQinclude.path
+		../include/relative.includeQfile:.git/../include/relative.includeQuser.relative
+		includeQfile:.git/configQuser.local
+		trueQfile:.git/configQuser.override
+		localQcmdline:Quser.cmdline
+		trueQ
+	EOF

I see you split this up more, but there's still quite a bit going on in
this one block. IMHO, it would be more customary in our tests to put the
setup into one test_expect_success block, then each of these
expect-run-cmp blocks into their own test_expect_success.

It does mean that the setup mutates the global test state for further
tests (and you should stop using test_config_*, which clean up at the
end of the block), but I think that's the right thing here. The point of
test_config is "flip on this switch just for a moment, so we can test
its effect without hurting further tests". But these are config tests in
the first place, and it is OK for them to show a progression of
mutations of the config (you'll note that like the other tests in this
script, you are clearing out .git/config in the first place).

TBH I am always a little annoyed if Git tests depend on each other. It makes
it harder to just disable all uninteresting tests and only focus on the one that 
I am working with. However, I agree with your point that the test block does too
many things. Would it be OK if I write a bash function that performs the test
setup? Then I would call this function in the beginning of every individual 
test. Or do you prefer the global state strategy?

Thanks,
Lars