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

From: Junio C Hamano <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2015 14:15:54 -0700

Mike Hommey <[email-masked]> writes:

>>  - 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?

>>  - 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.