From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4165DC77B75 for ; Fri, 12 May 2023 21:47:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S239349AbjELVr6 (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 May 2023 17:47:58 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:35396 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S235348AbjELVr5 (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 May 2023 17:47:57 -0400 Received: from mail-pl1-x62a.google.com (mail-pl1-x62a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::62a]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D45C72133 for ; Fri, 12 May 2023 14:47:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pl1-x62a.google.com with SMTP id d9443c01a7336-1aae5c2423dso101032015ad.3 for ; Fri, 12 May 2023 14:47:56 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20221208; t=1683928076; x=1686520076; h=mime-version:user-agent:message-id:in-reply-to:date:references :subject:cc:to:from:sender:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=8cXsQwgyQt47WsmI3jaRgDjYpKpdSr9Sk7jfXPLCB3E=; b=nfMqicJlD0N1g+vJOSuWnj7WDBBA8ne/zYz3UwwCyD5vEy4zJIyyCMEfuoAOe4ljVc f94HHpwuuxoNROvRFPlhqNJjr5l2CHQ8BcNqIJj1s5Pcnc6gR644bl4yAZ57EotGoZg4 xiyCvNJuTsyzQuoWevCRKzIrO+r84l69LVvPWs5EudrAAL6wp/PRELCyQGqpSJxZ0Imd wvY3/DHv+ywjrGLqZUZhscUGMu9t6r1DVGJhfs5cREZFobMzLIZFGAEYgRtSzKJEk0BB pLuhuAv0fb9VJRWgruHsc77XKXrL3dwPr5wRgH5+p5zQo1bcbk8O2pTKKPxxWUkj2GBN r7SA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20221208; t=1683928076; x=1686520076; h=mime-version:user-agent:message-id:in-reply-to:date:references :subject:cc:to:from:sender:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject :date:message-id:reply-to; bh=8cXsQwgyQt47WsmI3jaRgDjYpKpdSr9Sk7jfXPLCB3E=; b=McHud0bLRYnHyNdho9Kb3eSGpIGWd26fBSxEyhW/PlU/RqV7P+jc3bMpfy4uAi8Rfc 1GrnKKLwoaft9Df8coITGZfQ/lt+hUkBGd3DMs2VBhGe/7LzKPhAvYZUFBOfDHOzJnvJ bOhwsO2CFaPhQGd1qvCuj0VA26ckSh19G28cEwoVEOeNj05Kr7olpSa72BZJUwxMmEkF pohOPCI8rnqnR7gKd8WOsIbLRDwu5aQ1o4vo1HD1gqM2PS7X3xzr8wj52X9lpjV58Zjl C3LEbBfofuwwqJAL+Mpah87psK3fctwiGc6TUvETCmQG9u+Z8uM1rKxny2Z5p+W1fi5o qUow== X-Gm-Message-State: AC+VfDy1odz3sDptyb+hgx9Ja272It900XqbXiPy1bn8nht1LQQ0XuVw OOswqGL6OilaMTBmvnWYvCs1bFjCWhE= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACHHUZ7iX/ey9PVfAlbVyX0WHrkl9QjZI40qpRISpeBsMEta+oi214A/qG2TrDOCk6ZhN8TAi6MMUg== X-Received: by 2002:a17:903:2289:b0:1a6:84be:a08f with SMTP id b9-20020a170903228900b001a684bea08fmr31535578plh.64.1683928076175; Fri, 12 May 2023 14:47:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (187.137.203.35.bc.googleusercontent.com. [35.203.137.187]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id j5-20020a170902c3c500b001a6ff7bd4d9sm8445663plj.15.2023.05.12.14.47.55 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 12 May 2023 14:47:55 -0700 (PDT) Sender: Junio C Hamano From: Junio C Hamano To: Felipe Contreras Cc: Sergey Organov , Matthieu Moy , "git@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: Can we clarify the purpose of `git diff -s`? References: <645c5da0981c1_16961a29455@chronos.notmuch> <871qjn2i63.fsf@osv.gnss.ru> <5bb24e0208dd4a8ca5f6697d578f3ae0@SAMBXP02.univ-lyon1.fr> <4f713a29-1a34-2f71-ee54-c01020be903a@univ-lyon1.fr> <87h6shif6q.fsf@osv.gnss.ru> <645ea15eca6fa_21989f294f5@chronos.notmuch> <645ea94569b79_21b4f8294e7@chronos.notmuch> Date: Fri, 12 May 2023 14:47:55 -0700 In-Reply-To: <645ea94569b79_21b4f8294e7@chronos.notmuch> (Felipe Contreras's message of "Fri, 12 May 2023 15:01:57 -0600") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Felipe Contreras writes: > Junio C Hamano wrote: >> Felipe Contreras writes: >> >> > So your rationale to reject a perfectly logical behavior that *everyone* agrees >> > with is that it might break a hypothetical patch? >> >> Everyone is an overstatement, as there are only Sergey and you, > > Matthieu Moy also agreed [1]: > > Looking more closely, it's rather clear to me they are not, and that > > git show --raw --patch --no-patch > > should be equivalent to > > git show --raw > > That's pretty much everyone that has participated in the discussion. > >> and as we all saw in public some members stated they will not engage in a >> discussion thread in which you were involved. > > Smoke screen. > >> > Just do `--silent` instead. >> >> I am *not* shutting the door for "--no-patch"; I am only saying that >> it shouldn't be done so hastily. > >> But conflating the two will delay the fix for "-s sticks unnecessarily" that >> is ready for this cycle. > > That breaks backwards-compatibility. > > Why are your patches excempt from bacwards-compatibility considerations? It is not who wrote the patch. You either did not read what I wrote earlier in the thread ... is another reason why I want to be much more careful about "should --no-patch be changed to mean something other than -s" than "should -s be fixed not to be sticky for some but not all options". The latter is not a documented "feature" and it clearly was a bug that "-s --raw" did not honor "--raw". The former was a documented "feature", even though it may have been a suboptimal one. or you are trying to paint a picture that is different from reality with whatever motive you have. Either way, I am not done with the thread, as I said.