blame: respect .git-blame-ignore-revs automatically #1809
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
|
|
@@ -1105,6 +1105,14 @@ int cmd_blame(int argc, | |
| add_pending_object(&revs, &head_commit->object, "HEAD"); | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. On the Git mailing list, "Kristoffer Haugsbakk" wrote (reply to this): Hi Abhijeetsingh
For what it’s worth here’s how I imagine this feature could work
conceptually:
Before this feature/change, the effective config for Git use looks like this:
```
[blame]
```
No `blame.ignoreRevsFile`.
But with/after it:
```
[blame]
ignoreRevsFile=.git-blame-ignore-revs
```
This is the effective config. Not what the user has typed out.
If the user types out this:
```
[blame]
ignoreRevsFile=.git-blame-more-revs
```
Then this becomes their effective config:
```
[blame]
ignoreRevsFile=.git-blame-ignore-revs
ignoreRevsFile=.git-blame-more-revs
```
Now there are two files: the default one and the user-supplied one (this
config variable is documented as being multi-valued: “This option may be
repeated multiple times.”).
§ How to ignore this new default §§§
Considering users who do not want this new default:
```
[blame]
ignoreRevsFile=
```
This is the change they would have to make. Because a blank/empty
resets/empties the list of files.
On Sat, Oct 12, 2024, at 06:37, Abhijeetsingh Meena via GitGitGadget wrote:
> From: Abhijeetsingh Meena <abhijeet040403@gmail.com>
>
> git-blame(1) can ignore a list of commits with `--ignore-revs-file`.
> This is useful for marking uninteresting commits like formatting
> changes, refactors and whatever else should not be “blamed”. Some
> projects even version control this file so that all contributors can
> use it; the conventional name is `.git-blame-ignore-revs`.
>
> But each user still has to opt-in to the standard ignore list,
> either with this option or with the config `blame.ignoreRevsFile`.
> Let’s teach git-blame(1) to respect this conventional file in order
> to streamline the process.
>
> Signed-off-by: Abhijeetsingh Meena <abhijeet040403@gmail.com>
> ---
> builtin/blame.c | 8 ++++++++
> t/t8015-blame-default-ignore-revs.sh | 26 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 2 files changed, 34 insertions(+)
> create mode 100755 t/t8015-blame-default-ignore-revs.sh
>
> diff --git a/builtin/blame.c b/builtin/blame.c
> index e407a22da3b..1eddabaf60f 100644
> --- a/builtin/blame.c
> +++ b/builtin/blame.c
> @@ -1105,6 +1105,14 @@ parse_done:
> add_pending_object(&revs, &head_commit->object, "HEAD");
> }
>
> + /*
> + * By default, add .git-blame-ignore-revs to the list of files
> + * containing revisions to ignore if it exists.
> + */
> + if (access(".git-blame-ignore-revs", F_OK) == 0) {
> + string_list_append(&ignore_revs_file_list, ".git-blame-ignore-revs");
> + }
> +
I have not tested these patches. But I see why you check for file access/existence. Because with this config:
```
[blame]
ignoreRevsFile=.git-blame-ignore-revs
```
I get this warning in repositories that don’t have the file:
```
fatal: could not open object name list: .git-blame-ignore-revs
```
Which is just noise.
I get the same thing with Git Notes namespace configurations. I need to
configure them for certain repositories (like `amlog` in this project),
but then I get warnings about them when using the relevant commands in a
project that does not have them.
Maybe this is totally off-topic but I think it would make more sense if
`blame.ignoreRevsFile` just didn’t say anything if it didn’t find the
file. Because the point of the config might be to opt-in to this file
for those projects that does have it.
> init_scoreboard(&sb);
> sb.revs = &revs;
> sb.contents_from = contents_from;
> diff --git a/t/t8015-blame-default-ignore-revs.sh
> b/t/t8015-blame-default-ignore-revs.sh
> new file mode 100755
> index 00000000000..d4ab686f14d
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/t/t8015-blame-default-ignore-revs.sh
> @@ -0,0 +1,26 @@
> +#!/bin/sh
> +
> +test_description='default revisions to ignore when blaming'
> +
> +TEST_PASSES_SANITIZE_LEAK=true
> +. ./test-lib.sh
> +
> +test_expect_success 'blame: default-ignore-revs-file' '
> + test_commit first-commit hello.txt hello &&
> +
> + echo world >>hello.txt &&
> + test_commit second-commit hello.txt &&
> +
> + sed "1s/hello/hi/" <hello.txt > hello.txt.tmp &&
> + mv hello.txt.tmp hello.txt &&
> + test_commit third-commit hello.txt &&
> +
> + git rev-parse HEAD >ignored-file &&
> + git blame --ignore-revs-file=ignored-file hello.txt >expect &&
> + git rev-parse HEAD >.git-blame-ignore-revs &&
> + git blame hello.txt >actual &&
> +
> + test_cmp expect actual
> +'
> +
> +test_done
> --
> gitgitgadget
--
KristofferThere was a problem hiding this comment. On the Git mailing list, Phillip Wood wrote (reply to this): Hi Kristoffer
On 12/10/2024 14:58, Kristoffer Haugsbakk wrote:
> Hi Abhijeetsingh
> > Maybe this is totally off-topic but I think it would make more sense if
> `blame.ignoreRevsFile` just didn’t say anything if it didn’t find the
> file. Because the point of the config might be to opt-in to this file
> for those projects that does have it.
See https://lore.kernel.org/git/xmqqr1f5hszw.fsf@gitster.g/ for some discussion about this
Best Wishes
Phillip
There was a problem hiding this comment. On the Git mailing list, "Kristoffer Haugsbakk" wrote (reply to this): On Sun, Oct 13, 2024, at 17:25, Phillip Wood wrote:
> Hi Kristoffer
>> […]
>
> See https://lore.kernel.org/git/xmqqr1f5hszw.fsf@gitster.g/ for some
> discussion about this
>
> Best Wishes
>
> Phillip
Thanks! That was an interesting read. And an interesting idea.
And then today we got this:
https://lore.kernel.org/git/xmqq5ywehb69.fsf@gitster.g/T/#mce170a493a7b324c585124a9124356a0f87c77a6
--
Kristoffer
There was a problem hiding this comment. On the Git mailing list, Abhijeetsingh Meena wrote (reply to this): Hi Kristoffer,
Thank you for reviewing the v2 of my patch. I appreciate your
thoughtful feedback.
Before proceeding with v3, I’d like to address some of your questions
and suggestions.
> Hi Abhijeetsingh
>
> For what it’s worth here’s how I imagine this feature could work
> conceptually:
>
> Before this feature/change, the effective config for Git use looks like this:
>
> ```
> [blame]
> ```
>
> No `blame.ignoreRevsFile`.
>
> But with/after it:
>
> ```
> [blame]
> ignoreRevsFile=.git-blame-ignore-revs
> ```
>
> This is the effective config. Not what the user has typed out.
>
> If the user types out this:
>
> ```
> [blame]
> ignoreRevsFile=.git-blame-more-revs
> ```
>
> Then this becomes their effective config:
>
> ```
> [blame]
> ignoreRevsFile=.git-blame-ignore-revs
> ignoreRevsFile=.git-blame-more-revs
> ```
>
> Now there are two files: the default one and the user-supplied one (this
> config variable is documented as being multi-valued: “This option may be
> repeated multiple times.”).
>
> § How to ignore this new default §§§
>
> Considering users who do not want this new default:
>
> ```
> [blame]
> ignoreRevsFile=
> ```
>
> This is the change they would have to make. Because a blank/empty
> resets/empties the list of files.
Thanks, Kristoffer. Your conceptual explanation gave me a new
perspective on how this
feature can be implemented using the existing configuration flow
without disrupting
other settings. It has helped shape the solution, as I described in my
response to Eric earlier.
Based on Phillip's clue of exploring how this feature would interact
with existing configuration
settings and your conceptual workflow, I explored git_config_set and
used it to set the
blame.ignoreRevsFile configuration. This approach fits well with the
existing configuration
logic and provides greater flexibility.
With git_config_set to set blame.ignoreRevsFile:
git blame hello.txt
would consult the default .git-blame-ignore-revs file.
git blame --no-ignore-revs-file hello.txt
would disable the default ignore file.
git blame --no-ignore-revs-file --ignore-revs-file=ignore-list hello.txt
would allow the user to specify a custom ignore list while bypassing
the global list,
offering the flexibility you suggested.
This would maintain consistency with Git’s existing behavior, allowing
users to modify
configurations with a “last-wins” approach and enabling both global
and custom ignore
lists as needed.
> I have not tested these patches. But I see why you check for file access/existence. Because with this config:
>
> ```
> [blame]
> ignoreRevsFile=.git-blame-ignore-revs
> ```
>
> I get this warning in repositories that don’t have the file:
>
> ```
> fatal: could not open object name list: .git-blame-ignore-revs
> ```
>
> Which is just noise.
>
> I get the same thing with Git Notes namespace configurations. I need to
> configure them for certain repositories (like `amlog` in this project),
> but then I get warnings about them when using the relevant commands in a
> project that does not have them.
>
> Maybe this is totally off-topic but I think it would make more sense if
> `blame.ignoreRevsFile` just didn’t say anything if it didn’t find the
> file. Because the point of the config might be to opt-in to this file
> for those projects that does have it.
Yes, I agree. For a default ignore file, we shouldn't raise a fatal
error if the file is missing, especially if it’s not present in every
repository.
Suppressing the warning for the default file would improve user experience
and prevent unnecessary noise.
> > However, users may encounter cases where they need to
> > temporarily override these configurations to inspect all commits,
> > even those excluded by the ignore list. Currently, there is no
> > simple way to bypass all ignore revisions settings in one go.
>
> “No simple way” gives me pause. But there are those options/methods
> that we discussed before:
>
> • `--no-ignore-rev`
> • `--no-ignore-revs-file`
>
> These are not documented but I can provide these options and get a
> different output from git-blame(1).
>
> `builtin/blame.c` uses `parse-options.h` which provides automatic
> negated options. I just looked at the code today (so it’s new to me)
> but it seems like it will empty the lists that are associated with these
> options. See `parse-options-cb.c:parse_opt_string_list`.
>
> So I think this should be sufficient to reset all “ignore” options:
>
> ```
> git blame --no-ignore-rev --no-ignore-revs-file
> ```
>
> However I tested with this:
>
> ```
> git blame --ignore-revs-file=.git-blame-ignore-revs --no-ignore-revs
> ```
>
> And the output suggests to me that `--no-ignore-revs` affect the result
> of the before-mentioned list of files. Even though these are two
> different lists. I can’t make sense of that from the code. But I’m not
> a C programmer so this might just be a me-problem.
Yes, --no-ignore-revs-file and --no-ignore-rev flags work as intended
to bypass the configuration that ignores revisions. They are separate lists, so
--no-ignore-revs shouldn’t affect the --ignore-revs-file list. My previous
testing post v1 had some issues in test setup, which led me to believe that
the --no-ignore flags don’t work and I worked on --override-ignore-revs.
> > which allows users to easily bypass the --ignore-revs-file
> > option, --ignore-rev option and the blame.ignoreRevsFile
>
> I can see no precedence for the name “override” for an option in this
> project. The convention is `--[no-]option`.
>
> Like Eric Sunshine discussed: a common convention is to let the user
> activate and negate options according to the last-wins rule. This is
> pretty useful in my opinion. Because I can then make an alias which
> displays some Git Note:
>
> ```
> timber = log [options] --notes=results
> ```
>
> But then what if I don’t want any notes for a specific invocation? I
> don’t have to copy the whole alias and modify it. I can just:
>
> ```
> git timber --no-notes
> ```
>
> And the same goes for an alias which disables notes:
>
> ```
> timber = log [options] --no-notes
> ```
>
> Because then I can use `git timber --notes=results`.
I agree that the override option is unnecessary, as both
--no-ignore-rev and --no-ignore-revs-file
already allow users to bypass the ignore configurations. Also, the
“last-wins” approach is more
useful and aligns with how Git typically handles configurations. It’s
flexible and user-friendly,
allowing for easy toggling within aliases or individual commands.
Implementing this using the
existing configuration method, such as git_config_set, would be a
clean and effective solution
to ensure that users can quickly modify or negate options as needed.
> > configuration. When this option is used, git blame will completely
> > disregard all configured ignore revisions lists.
> >> The motivation behind this feature is to provide users with more
> > flexibility when dealing with large codebases that rely on
> > .git-blame-ignore-revs files for shared configurations, while
> > still allowing them to disable the ignore list when necessary
> > for troubleshooting or deeper inspections.
>
> You might be able to achieve the same thing with the existing negated
> options.
>
> If you *cannot* disable all “ignore” config and options in one negated
> one then you might want an option like `--no-ignores` which acts like:
>
> ```
> git blame --no-ignore-rev --no-ignore-revs-file
> ```
Yes, the override option isn’t necessary since the existing flags work
as intended.
If needed in the future, we can add a single flag to reset both lists, or as you
mentioned it can be an alias too.
> > + if (!override_ignore_revs) {
> > + build_ignorelist(&sb, &ignore_revs_file_list, &ignore_rev_list);
> > + }
> > +
>
> This demonstrates the more limited behavior: you either override
> (discard) the ignores or you don’t. With the negated options you build
> up and reset/empty those lists before you get to this point. That ends
> up being more flexible for the user.
Yes, this approach was more limited, we can follow the approach
described earlier that uses git_config_set to handle ignoring
revisions and revision lists more flexibly.
Thanks again for your detailed feedback. I hope this approach is
better than my previous approach.
I’ll incorporate these changes and move forward with v3. Looking
forward to your further thoughts!
Best regards,
Abhijeetsingh
On Sat, Oct 12, 2024 at 7:28 PM Kristoffer Haugsbakk
<code@khaugsbakk.name> wrote:
>
> Hi Abhijeetsingh
>
> For what it’s worth here’s how I imagine this feature could work
> conceptually:
>
> Before this feature/change, the effective config for Git use looks like this:
>
> ```
> [blame]
> ```
>
> No `blame.ignoreRevsFile`.
>
> But with/after it:
>
> ```
> [blame]
> ignoreRevsFile=.git-blame-ignore-revs
> ```
>
> This is the effective config. Not what the user has typed out.
>
> If the user types out this:
>
> ```
> [blame]
> ignoreRevsFile=.git-blame-more-revs
> ```
>
> Then this becomes their effective config:
>
> ```
> [blame]
> ignoreRevsFile=.git-blame-ignore-revs
> ignoreRevsFile=.git-blame-more-revs
> ```
>
> Now there are two files: the default one and the user-supplied one (this
> config variable is documented as being multi-valued: “This option may be
> repeated multiple times.”).
>
> § How to ignore this new default §§§
>
> Considering users who do not want this new default:
>
> ```
> [blame]
> ignoreRevsFile=
> ```
>
> This is the change they would have to make. Because a blank/empty
> resets/empties the list of files.
>
> On Sat, Oct 12, 2024, at 06:37, Abhijeetsingh Meena via GitGitGadget wrote:
> > From: Abhijeetsingh Meena <abhijeet040403@gmail.com>
> >
> > git-blame(1) can ignore a list of commits with `--ignore-revs-file`.
> > This is useful for marking uninteresting commits like formatting
> > changes, refactors and whatever else should not be “blamed”. Some
> > projects even version control this file so that all contributors can
> > use it; the conventional name is `.git-blame-ignore-revs`.
> >
> > But each user still has to opt-in to the standard ignore list,
> > either with this option or with the config `blame.ignoreRevsFile`.
> > Let’s teach git-blame(1) to respect this conventional file in order
> > to streamline the process.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Abhijeetsingh Meena <abhijeet040403@gmail.com>
> > ---
> > builtin/blame.c | 8 ++++++++
> > t/t8015-blame-default-ignore-revs.sh | 26 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > 2 files changed, 34 insertions(+)
> > create mode 100755 t/t8015-blame-default-ignore-revs.sh
> >
> > diff --git a/builtin/blame.c b/builtin/blame.c
> > index e407a22da3b..1eddabaf60f 100644
> > --- a/builtin/blame.c
> > +++ b/builtin/blame.c
> > @@ -1105,6 +1105,14 @@ parse_done:
> > add_pending_object(&revs, &head_commit->object, "HEAD");
> > }
> >
> > + /*
> > + * By default, add .git-blame-ignore-revs to the list of files
> > + * containing revisions to ignore if it exists.
> > + */
> > + if (access(".git-blame-ignore-revs", F_OK) == 0) {
> > + string_list_append(&ignore_revs_file_list, ".git-blame-ignore-revs");
> > + }
> > +
>
> I have not tested these patches. But I see why you check for file access/existence. Because with this config:
>
> ```
> [blame]
> ignoreRevsFile=.git-blame-ignore-revs
> ```
>
> I get this warning in repositories that don’t have the file:
>
> ```
> fatal: could not open object name list: .git-blame-ignore-revs
> ```
>
> Which is just noise.
>
> I get the same thing with Git Notes namespace configurations. I need to
> configure them for certain repositories (like `amlog` in this project),
> but then I get warnings about them when using the relevant commands in a
> project that does not have them.
>
> Maybe this is totally off-topic but I think it would make more sense if
> `blame.ignoreRevsFile` just didn’t say anything if it didn’t find the
> file. Because the point of the config might be to opt-in to this file
> for those projects that does have it.
>
> > init_scoreboard(&sb);
> > sb.revs = &revs;
> > sb.contents_from = contents_from;
> > diff --git a/t/t8015-blame-default-ignore-revs.sh
> > b/t/t8015-blame-default-ignore-revs.sh
> > new file mode 100755
> > index 00000000000..d4ab686f14d
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/t/t8015-blame-default-ignore-revs.sh
> > @@ -0,0 +1,26 @@
> > +#!/bin/sh
> > +
> > +test_description='default revisions to ignore when blaming'
> > +
> > +TEST_PASSES_SANITIZE_LEAK=true
> > +. ./test-lib.sh
> > +
> > +test_expect_success 'blame: default-ignore-revs-file' '
> > + test_commit first-commit hello.txt hello &&
> > +
> > + echo world >>hello.txt &&
> > + test_commit second-commit hello.txt &&
> > +
> > + sed "1s/hello/hi/" <hello.txt > hello.txt.tmp &&
> > + mv hello.txt.tmp hello.txt &&
> > + test_commit third-commit hello.txt &&
> > +
> > + git rev-parse HEAD >ignored-file &&
> > + git blame --ignore-revs-file=ignored-file hello.txt >expect &&
> > + git rev-parse HEAD >.git-blame-ignore-revs &&
> > + git blame hello.txt >actual &&
> > +
> > + test_cmp expect actual
> > +'
> > +
> > +test_done
> > --
> > gitgitgadget
>
> --
> KristofferThere was a problem hiding this comment. On the Git mailing list, Phillip Wood wrote (reply to this): Hi Abhijeetsingh
On 12/10/2024 05:37, Abhijeetsingh Meena via GitGitGadget wrote:
> From: Abhijeetsingh Meena <abhijeet040403@gmail.com>
> > git-blame(1) can ignore a list of commits with `--ignore-revs-file`.
> This is useful for marking uninteresting commits like formatting
> changes, refactors and whatever else should not be “blamed”. Some
> projects even version control this file so that all contributors can
> use it; the conventional name is `.git-blame-ignore-revs`.
> > But each user still has to opt-in to the standard ignore list,
> either with this option or with the config `blame.ignoreRevsFile`.
> Let’s teach git-blame(1) to respect this conventional file in order
> to streamline the process.
It's good that the commit message now mentions the config setting. It would be helpful to explain why the original implementation deliberately decided not to implement a default file and explain why it is now a good idea to do so. Supporting a default file in addition to the files listed in blame.ignoreRevsFile config setting leaves us in an odd position compared to other settings which use a fixed name like .gitignore or have a default that can be overridden by a config setting like core.excludesFile or require a config setting to enable the feature like diff.orderFile.
I've left a couple of code comments below but really the most important things are to come up with a convincing reason for changing the behavior and figuring out how the default file should interact with the config setting.
> + /*
> + * By default, add .git-blame-ignore-revs to the list of files
> + * containing revisions to ignore if it exists.
> + */
> + if (access(".git-blame-ignore-revs", F_OK) == 0) {
There are some uses of "access(.., F_OK)" in our code base but it is more usual to call file_exists() these days.
> + string_list_append(&ignore_revs_file_list, ".git-blame-ignore-revs");
If the user already has this path in their config we'll waste time parsing it twice. We could avoid that by using a "struct strset" rather than a "struct string_list". I don't think we have OPT_STRSET but it should be easy to add one by copying OPT_STRING_LIST.
> + echo world >>hello.txt &&
> + test_commit second-commit hello.txt &&
test_commit overwrites the file it is committing so you need to use the --printf option
test_commit --printf second-commit hello.txt "hello\nworld\n"
> + git rev-parse HEAD >ignored-file &&
> + git blame --ignore-revs-file=ignored-file hello.txt >expect &&
> + git rev-parse HEAD >.git-blame-ignore-revs &&
> + git blame hello.txt >actual &&
> + test_cmp expect actual
I have mixed feelings about this sort of differential testing, comparing the actual output of git blame to what we expect makes it unambiguous that the test is checking what we want it to.
Best Wishes
Phillip
There was a problem hiding this comment. On the Git mailing list, Abhijeetsingh Meena wrote (reply to this): Hi Phillip,
Thank you for reviewing the patch and providing valuable feedback.
I’d like to address some of your points below:
> Supporting a default file in addition to the files listed in
> blame.ignoreRevsFile config setting leaves us in an odd position
> compared to other settings which use a fixed name like .gitignore
> or have a default that can be overridden by a config setting like
> core.excludesFile or require a config setting to enable the feature
> like diff.orderFile.
Yes, I now understand that we can solve this by using the existing method for
interacting with configurations, as suggested by you and Kristoffer. We can work
with the existing configuration method like git_config_set to set ignore
revisions file. This (I hope) will also keep it consistent with how
other settings like .gitignore
and core.excludesFile work, making the interaction more predictable for users.
> I've left a couple of code comments below but really
> the most important things are to come up with a convincing
> reason for changing the behavior and figuring out how
> the default file should interact with the config setting.
I agree. After revisiting the use case and the flow, I see now that
the solution can be
more straightforward with git_config_set than my previous approach. This
behavior allows for interaction through the configuration system
without the need to
introduce new options. Kristoffer’s suggestion clarified that handling
.git-blame-ignore-revs
a default file and allowing it to be overridden or disabled via
--no-ignore-revs-file is sufficient.
> As Kristoffer has pointed out --no-ignore-revs-file should
> be sufficient to disable the default file. If it isn't we
> should fix it so that it is, not add a new option.
Absolutely, you're right. After revisiting my earlier testing issues,
I realized that the
--no-ignore-revs-file and --no-ignore-rev flag works as intended. My
previous confusion was due to a mistake in my test setup. I agree with your
suggestion that we should not add a new option and instead focus on ensuring
that the current flag behavior is clear and functions correctly.
Thanks again for your review. I hope this approach is better than my
previous approach.
I’ll make sure the changes are implemented correctly in v3
and test the interaction between the default file and config settings
more thoroughly.
Looking forward to your further thoughts!
Best regards,
Abhijeetsingh
On Sun, Oct 13, 2024 at 8:48 PM Phillip Wood <phillip.wood123@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Abhijeetsingh
>
> On 12/10/2024 05:37, Abhijeetsingh Meena via GitGitGadget wrote:
> > From: Abhijeetsingh Meena <abhijeet040403@gmail.com>
> >
> > git-blame(1) can ignore a list of commits with `--ignore-revs-file`.
> > This is useful for marking uninteresting commits like formatting
> > changes, refactors and whatever else should not be “blamed”. Some
> > projects even version control this file so that all contributors can
> > use it; the conventional name is `.git-blame-ignore-revs`.
> >
> > But each user still has to opt-in to the standard ignore list,
> > either with this option or with the config `blame.ignoreRevsFile`.
> > Let’s teach git-blame(1) to respect this conventional file in order
> > to streamline the process.
>
> It's good that the commit message now mentions the config setting. It
> would be helpful to explain why the original implementation deliberately
> decided not to implement a default file and explain why it is now a good
> idea to do so. Supporting a default file in addition to the files listed
> in blame.ignoreRevsFile config setting leaves us in an odd position
> compared to other settings which use a fixed name like .gitignore or
> have a default that can be overridden by a config setting like
> core.excludesFile or require a config setting to enable the feature like
> diff.orderFile.
>
> I've left a couple of code comments below but really the most important
> things are to come up with a convincing reason for changing the behavior
> and figuring out how the default file should interact with the config
> setting.
>
> > + /*
> > + * By default, add .git-blame-ignore-revs to the list of files
> > + * containing revisions to ignore if it exists.
> > + */
> > + if (access(".git-blame-ignore-revs", F_OK) == 0) {
>
> There are some uses of "access(.., F_OK)" in our code base but it is
> more usual to call file_exists() these days.
>
> > + string_list_append(&ignore_revs_file_list, ".git-blame-ignore-revs");
>
> If the user already has this path in their config we'll waste time
> parsing it twice. We could avoid that by using a "struct strset" rather
> than a "struct string_list". I don't think we have OPT_STRSET but it
> should be easy to add one by copying OPT_STRING_LIST.
>
> > + echo world >>hello.txt &&
> > + test_commit second-commit hello.txt &&
>
> test_commit overwrites the file it is committing so you need to use the
> --printf option
>
> test_commit --printf second-commit hello.txt "hello\nworld\n"
>
> > + git rev-parse HEAD >ignored-file &&
> > + git blame --ignore-revs-file=ignored-file hello.txt >expect &&
> > + git rev-parse HEAD >.git-blame-ignore-revs &&
> > + git blame hello.txt >actual &&
> > + test_cmp expect actual
>
> I have mixed feelings about this sort of differential testing, comparing
> the actual output of git blame to what we expect makes it unambiguous
> that the test is checking what we want it to.
>
> Best Wishes
>
> Phillip
>There was a problem hiding this comment. On the Git mailing list, Abhijeetsingh Meena wrote (reply to this): Hi Eric, Kristoffer, and Phillip,
Thank you for reviewing the v2 of my patch. I appreciate your
thoughtful feedback.
A few days ago, I sent a detailed email addressing each of your
questions and suggestions individually. Before proceeding with v3,
I’d like to consolidate my thoughts on the next possible approach
to respect '.git-blame-ignore-revs' based on Kristoffer's conceptual
explanation.
> Hi Abhijeetsingh
>
> For what it’s worth here’s how I imagine this feature could work
> conceptually:
>
> Before this feature/change, the effective config for Git use looks like this:
>
> ```
> [blame]
> ```
>
> No `blame.ignoreRevsFile`.
>
> But with/after it:
>
> ```
> [blame]
> ignoreRevsFile=.git-blame-ignore-revs
> ```
>
> This is the effective config. Not what the user has typed out.
>
> If the user types out this:
>
> ```
> [blame]
> ignoreRevsFile=.git-blame-more-revs
> ```
>
> Then this becomes their effective config:
>
> ```
> [blame]
> ignoreRevsFile=.git-blame-ignore-revs
> ignoreRevsFile=.git-blame-more-revs
> ```
>
> Now there are two files: the default one and the user-supplied one (this
> config variable is documented as being multi-valued: “This option may be
> repeated multiple times.”).
>
> § How to ignore this new default §§§
>
> Considering users who do not want this new default:
>
> ```
> [blame]
> ignoreRevsFile=
> ```
>
> This is the change they would have to make. Because a blank/empty
> resets/empties the list of files.
Thanks, Kristoffer. Your conceptual explanation gave me a new
perspective on how this feature can be implemented using the
existing configuration flow without disrupting other settings.
Based on Phillip's clue of exploring how this feature would interact
with existing configuration settings and your conceptual workflow,
I explored git_config_set and used it to set the
blame.ignoreRevsFile configuration. This approach aligns well with
the existing configuration logic and provides greater flexibility.
With git_config_set to set blame.ignoreRevsFile:
git blame hello.txt
would consult the default .git-blame-ignore-revs file.
git blame --no-ignore-revs-file hello.txt
would disable the default ignore file.
git blame --no-ignore-revs-file --ignore-revs-file=ignore-list hello.txt
would allow the user to specify a custom ignore list while bypassing
the global list, offering the flexibility you suggested.
This would maintain consistency with Git’s existing behavior, allowing
users to modify configurations with a “last-wins” approach and enabling
both global and custom ignore lists as needed.
I hope this approach is better than my previous one. I look forward to
your thoughts!
Best Regards,
Abhijeetsingh
On Wed, Oct 16, 2024 at 11:37 AM Abhijeetsingh Meena
<abhijeetsingh.github@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Phillip,
> Thank you for reviewing the patch and providing valuable feedback.
> I’d like to address some of your points below:
>
>
> > Supporting a default file in addition to the files listed in
> > blame.ignoreRevsFile config setting leaves us in an odd position
> > compared to other settings which use a fixed name like .gitignore
> > or have a default that can be overridden by a config setting like
> > core.excludesFile or require a config setting to enable the feature
> > like diff.orderFile.
>
> Yes, I now understand that we can solve this by using the existing method for
> interacting with configurations, as suggested by you and Kristoffer. We can work
> with the existing configuration method like git_config_set to set ignore
> revisions file. This (I hope) will also keep it consistent with how
> other settings like .gitignore
> and core.excludesFile work, making the interaction more predictable for users.
>
>
> > I've left a couple of code comments below but really
> > the most important things are to come up with a convincing
> > reason for changing the behavior and figuring out how
> > the default file should interact with the config setting.
>
> I agree. After revisiting the use case and the flow, I see now that
> the solution can be
> more straightforward with git_config_set than my previous approach. This
> behavior allows for interaction through the configuration system
> without the need to
> introduce new options. Kristoffer’s suggestion clarified that handling
> .git-blame-ignore-revs
> a default file and allowing it to be overridden or disabled via
> --no-ignore-revs-file is sufficient.
>
>
> > As Kristoffer has pointed out --no-ignore-revs-file should
> > be sufficient to disable the default file. If it isn't we
> > should fix it so that it is, not add a new option.
>
> Absolutely, you're right. After revisiting my earlier testing issues,
> I realized that the
> --no-ignore-revs-file and --no-ignore-rev flag works as intended. My
> previous confusion was due to a mistake in my test setup. I agree with your
> suggestion that we should not add a new option and instead focus on ensuring
> that the current flag behavior is clear and functions correctly.
>
>
> Thanks again for your review. I hope this approach is better than my
> previous approach.
> I’ll make sure the changes are implemented correctly in v3
> and test the interaction between the default file and config settings
> more thoroughly.
> Looking forward to your further thoughts!
>
> Best regards,
> Abhijeetsingh
>
> On Sun, Oct 13, 2024 at 8:48 PM Phillip Wood <phillip.wood123@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Abhijeetsingh
> >
> > On 12/10/2024 05:37, Abhijeetsingh Meena via GitGitGadget wrote:
> > > From: Abhijeetsingh Meena <abhijeet040403@gmail.com>
> > >
> > > git-blame(1) can ignore a list of commits with `--ignore-revs-file`.
> > > This is useful for marking uninteresting commits like formatting
> > > changes, refactors and whatever else should not be “blamed”. Some
> > > projects even version control this file so that all contributors can
> > > use it; the conventional name is `.git-blame-ignore-revs`.
> > >
> > > But each user still has to opt-in to the standard ignore list,
> > > either with this option or with the config `blame.ignoreRevsFile`.
> > > Let’s teach git-blame(1) to respect this conventional file in order
> > > to streamline the process.
> >
> > It's good that the commit message now mentions the config setting. It
> > would be helpful to explain why the original implementation deliberately
> > decided not to implement a default file and explain why it is now a good
> > idea to do so. Supporting a default file in addition to the files listed
> > in blame.ignoreRevsFile config setting leaves us in an odd position
> > compared to other settings which use a fixed name like .gitignore or
> > have a default that can be overridden by a config setting like
> > core.excludesFile or require a config setting to enable the feature like
> > diff.orderFile.
> >
> > I've left a couple of code comments below but really the most important
> > things are to come up with a convincing reason for changing the behavior
> > and figuring out how the default file should interact with the config
> > setting.
> >
> > > + /*
> > > + * By default, add .git-blame-ignore-revs to the list of files
> > > + * containing revisions to ignore if it exists.
> > > + */
> > > + if (access(".git-blame-ignore-revs", F_OK) == 0) {
> >
> > There are some uses of "access(.., F_OK)" in our code base but it is
> > more usual to call file_exists() these days.
> >
> > > + string_list_append(&ignore_revs_file_list, ".git-blame-ignore-revs");
> >
> > If the user already has this path in their config we'll waste time
> > parsing it twice. We could avoid that by using a "struct strset" rather
> > than a "struct string_list". I don't think we have OPT_STRSET but it
> > should be easy to add one by copying OPT_STRING_LIST.
> >
> > > + echo world >>hello.txt &&
> > > + test_commit second-commit hello.txt &&
> >
> > test_commit overwrites the file it is committing so you need to use the
> > --printf option
> >
> > test_commit --printf second-commit hello.txt "hello\nworld\n"
> >
> > > + git rev-parse HEAD >ignored-file &&
> > > + git blame --ignore-revs-file=ignored-file hello.txt >expect &&
> > > + git rev-parse HEAD >.git-blame-ignore-revs &&
> > > + git blame hello.txt >actual &&
> > > + test_cmp expect actual
> >
> > I have mixed feelings about this sort of differential testing, comparing
> > the actual output of git blame to what we expect makes it unambiguous
> > that the test is checking what we want it to.
> >
> > Best Wishes
> >
> > Phillip
> >There was a problem hiding this comment. On the Git mailing list, Eric Sunshine wrote (reply to this): On Tue, Oct 22, 2024 at 2:49 AM Abhijeetsingh Meena
<abhijeetsingh.github@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Eric, Kristoffer, and Phillip,
>
> A few days ago, I sent a detailed email addressing each of your
> questions and suggestions individually. Before proceeding with v3,
> I’d like to consolidate my thoughts on the next possible approach
> to respect '.git-blame-ignore-revs' based on Kristoffer's conceptual
> explanation.
Although I asked several questions (which popped into my head) during
my review of the patch, I don't have much to add to the discussion
since I don't use this feature and either wasn't aware of it or forgot
about it until your patch arrived.
Phillip is off-list through the end of the month, so it is unlikely
that he will respond before then.
The general idea of implementing this new behavior via config-list may
indeed be a reasonable way to make it more well-integrated with the
existing methods of specifying ignore-revs. However, that's also an
implementation detail which seems less important presently than these
possible open concerns (unless they've been answered elsewhere), all
of which have to do with forward and backward compatibility...
* Will automatic reading of top-level .git-blame-ignore-revs cause any
unexpected behaviors for existing users who (presumably) are using it
via configuration? It seems unlikely, but the implementation ought to
be careful to process .git-blame-ignore-revs only once.
* Will automatic reading of .git-blame-ignore-revs cause unexpected
behavior for people who have not set up the configuration? In other
words, maybe some projects have a .git-blame-ignore-revs but some
users don't want it consulted by default, thus avoid setting the
configuration.
* It sounds like you want to punt on the idea of cumulatively
processing .git-blame-ignore-revs files from the current subdirectory
up to the project root (as .gitignore works), but can this be done in
such a way that we don't break user's expectations or automations if
such behavior is eventually implemented? |
||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| /* | ||
| * By default, add .git-blame-ignore-revs to the list of files | ||
| * containing revisions to ignore if it exists. | ||
| */ | ||
| if (access(".git-blame-ignore-revs", F_OK) == 0) { | ||
| string_list_append(&ignore_revs_file_list, ".git-blame-ignore-revs"); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| init_scoreboard(&sb); | ||
| sb.revs = &revs; | ||
| sb.contents_from = contents_from; | ||
|
|
||
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
| @@ -0,0 +1,26 @@ | ||
| #!/bin/sh | ||
|
|
||
| test_description='default revisions to ignore when blaming' | ||
|
|
||
| TEST_PASSES_SANITIZE_LEAK=true | ||
| . ./test-lib.sh | ||
|
|
||
| test_expect_success 'blame: default-ignore-revs-file' ' | ||
| test_commit first-commit hello.txt hello && | ||
|
|
||
| echo world >>hello.txt && | ||
| test_commit second-commit hello.txt && | ||
|
|
||
| sed "1s/hello/hi/" <hello.txt > hello.txt.tmp && | ||
| mv hello.txt.tmp hello.txt && | ||
| test_commit third-commit hello.txt && | ||
|
|
||
| git rev-parse HEAD >ignored-file && | ||
| git blame --ignore-revs-file=ignored-file hello.txt >expect && | ||
| git rev-parse HEAD >.git-blame-ignore-revs && | ||
| git blame hello.txt >actual && | ||
|
|
||
| test_cmp expect actual | ||
| ' | ||
|
|
||
| test_done |
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
On the Git mailing list, Eric Sunshine wrote (reply to this):
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
On the Git mailing list, Eric Sunshine wrote (reply to this):
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
On the Git mailing list, Taylor Blau wrote (reply to this):
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
On the Git mailing list, Abhijeetsingh Meena wrote (reply to this):