Re: [PATCH 1/2] ref-filter: hacky "streaming" mode
From: ZheNing Hu <hidden>
Date: 2021-09-20 07:42:39
Jeff King [off-list ref] 于2021年9月17日周五 上午5:45写道:
On Wed, Sep 15, 2021 at 10:23:43PM +0800, ZheNing Hu wrote:quoted
ZheNing Hu [off-list ref] 于2021年9月15日周三 下午8:27写道:quoted
quoted
So yes, it's complicated. And it must be explained to the user that "%(refname)" behaves slightly differently with "git tag --verify", but that is unavoidable if we do not want to break scripts (it _already_ behaves slightly differently, and we just never told anyone).$ git tag --verify --format='verify: %(refname) %(symref)' annotated symref verify: annotated verify: symref $ git tag --verify --format='verify: %(refname) %(symref)' refs/tags/annotated refs/tags/symref error: tag 'refs/tags/annotated' not found. error: tag 'refs/tags/symref' not found.This is expected. When you provide a tag name on the command line of "git tag" it is assumed to be a non-qualified name in refs/tags/ (and ditto for git-branch and refs/heads/). It is tempting to try to be friendly and accept fully-qualified refs there, but it would create ambiguities (e.g., you could really have refs/tags/refs/tags/foo as a ref).
Yeah, maybe you are right, for git tag --verify, there may have ambiguities. But for git verify-tag, if we have tags like "refs/tags/refs/tags/foo" and "refs/tags/foo": $ git verify-tag --format='verify: %(refname) %(symref)' refs/tags/foo warning: refname 'refs/tags/foo' is ambiguous. We see the ambiguities too here.
I think we can ignore that for our purposes here, though. It's a question of input from the command-line, and we focus on just the output that we produce.
Yeah, but using different functions (read_ref_full(), get_oid()) will affect what kind of input we can provide.
quoted
$ git verify-tag --format='verify: %(refname) %(symref)' annotated symref verify: annotated verify: symref $ git verify-tag --format='verify: %(refname) %(symref)' refs/tags/annotated refs/tags/symref verify: refs/tags/annotated verify: refs/tags/symref As we can see, there is a slight difference between git tag --verify and git verify-tag: git tag --verify can not handle refs' fullname refs/tags/* (because read_ref_full() | read_ref() can't handle them). So, as a standard, which characteristics should we keep?Whereas are you notice here, verify-tag takes any name (which could be fully qualified), and uses it as-is. In fact, it might not even be a ref at all! You can say "git verify-tag c06b72d02" if you want to. And as a plumbing tool, we should make sure this continues to work. For example, careful scripts may resolve a ref into an object, and want to continue talking about that object without worrying about the ref being changed simultaneously.
Yes, this feature is very bad. %(refname) seems to do the %(objectname) work.
But it also creates a weirdness for "git verify-tag --format". We do not
necessarily even have a ref to show. So IMHO the feature is somewhat
mis-designed in the first place. But we should probably continue to
support it as best we can.
The best I can come up with is:
- when we resolve the name, if it was a ref, we should record that.
I think this is hard to do now. It would probably require
get_oid_with_context() learning to report on the results it got from
dwim_ref().
- if we have a refname, then feed it to pretty_print_ref() as a
fully-qualified name. And pass whatever "default lstrip=2" magic we
come up with for "git tag --verify". That would mean that "git
verify-tag --format=%(refname) v2.33.0" would behave the same before
and after.
- if we didn't get a refname, then...I guess continue to pass the name
the user gave us into pretty_print_ref()? That would keep "git
verify-tag --format=%(refname) c06b72d02" working as it does today.
The alternative is to do none of those things, and just document that
"verify-tag" is weird:
- its %(refname) reports whatever you gave it, whether it is a ref or
not
- some advanced format placeholders like %(symref) may not work if you
don't pass a fully-qualified ref
-PeffThis is my solution according to your above suggection: https://lore.kernel.org/git/pull.1042.git.1632123476.gitgitgadget@gmail.com/ (local) Thanks. -- ZheNing Hu