On Mon, Apr 24, 2023 at 02:17:31PM -0600, Felipe Contreras wrote:
> Patrick Steinhardt wrote:
> > Parsing the output of fetches is mostly impossible. It prettifies
> > reference names that are about to be updated, doesn't print the old and
> > new object IDs the refs are being updated from and to, and prints all of
> > that information in nice columns. In short, it is designed to be read by
> > humans rather than machines.
> > 
> > This makes it hard to use in a script way though, e.g. to learn about
> > which references actually have been updated or which have not been
> > updated. This patch series intends to fix that by introducing a new
> > machine-parseable interface:
> > 
> > ```
> > $ git fetch --output-format=porcelain --no-progress
> >   fff5a5e7f528b2ed2c335991399a766c2cf01103 af67688dca57999fd848f051eeea1d375ba546b2 refs/remotes/origin/master
> > * 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000 e046fe5a36a970bc14fbfbcb2074a48776f6b671 refs/remotes/origin/x86-rep-insns
> > * 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000 bb81ed6862b864c9eb99447f04d49a84ecb647e5 refs/tags/v6.3-rc4
> > * 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000 83af7b1468c0dca86b4dc9e43e73bfa4f38d9637 refs/tags/v6.3-rc5
> > * 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000 ab3affb8ed84f68638162fe7e6fd4055e15bff5b refs/tags/v6.3-rc6
> > * 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000 1c8c28415e8743368a2b800520a6dd0b22ee6ec2 refs/tags/v6.3-rc7
> > ```
> 
> Makes sense, my only question is what other format could `git fetch` have? I
> think `--format=porcelain` is clear enough.

Yeah, I'd be perfectly happy to rename this to `--format=porcelain`.
I'll wait for the Review Club that discusses this patch set tomorrow and
will send a new version with that change afterwards if nobody disagrees.

Patrick