From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Jim Porter Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#67062: 30.0.50; [PATCH] Abbreviate the revision in 'vc-annotate' (for Git) Date: Sun, 12 Nov 2023 14:15:20 -0800 Message-ID: <75f8d9ca-8d15-c968-7fb2-3ef4c6731fae@gmail.com> References: <66fc4912-6aa5-79da-bd6f-52f068cf1a77@gmail.com> <83y1f4wxby.fsf@gnu.org> <2eb31324-ae24-db4b-4f62-a0140bfb9f81@gutov.dev> <83sf5bv77j.fsf@gnu.org> <399f2f1e-7c1f-e272-2a9d-4e36e8d8666b@gmail.com> <894ab706-20ff-8773-be39-9d4a3c924872@gutov.dev> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="38084"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: 67062@debbugs.gnu.org To: Dmitry Gutov , Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sun Nov 12 23:16:34 2023 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1r2Iks-0009of-GE for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 12 Nov 2023 23:16:34 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1r2Ikg-0006QI-9C; Sun, 12 Nov 2023 17:16:22 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1r2Ikf-0006Pw-5i for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 12 Nov 2023 17:16:21 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:5::43]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1r2Ike-0000fr-O7 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 12 Nov 2023 17:16:20 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1r2IlJ-00066I-S6 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 12 Nov 2023 17:17:01 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Jim Porter Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sun, 12 Nov 2023 22:17:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 67062 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: patch Original-Received: via spool by 67062-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B67062.169982737023363 (code B ref 67062); Sun, 12 Nov 2023 22:17:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 67062) by debbugs.gnu.org; 12 Nov 2023 22:16:10 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:57206 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1r2IkU-00064k-FI for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 12 Nov 2023 17:16:10 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-oi1-x22f.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::22f]:51228) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1r2IkS-00063V-5H for 67062@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 12 Nov 2023 17:16:08 -0500 Original-Received: by mail-oi1-x22f.google.com with SMTP id 5614622812f47-3b6d80daae8so1122836b6e.2 for <67062@debbugs.gnu.org>; Sun, 12 Nov 2023 14:15:26 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1699827321; x=1700432121; darn=debbugs.gnu.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:references:cc:to :content-language:subject:mime-version:date:message-id:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=/+KrL80b01ymyS/sYD6vnOxTaUkbqq5SmSnkCz6O+UU=; b=P0aJBGm6vMrofPTgjoW1oAkLA7bMxPF0xjZ+HwzXoQ4nf+z9PTtEGNNBob0JXFQPlG MBgrdoVfY29T+5FiHMVP3h4UC9Ck/LVdTiV4uZaESXiqvDZJ98kYNHkl3zfLaVFHHXR1 Rov/h/NEkjuWWJukEanB0yTVQHblL3e/pfuMOOoDz+52cB8ZxBDXINztp4lyGtIy9gj0 ehc1KPAKVrHGLhSKx4c+RSlT+n7wzO8nNQ7muSvV5wL5yzjwQBRm6dl3qFdzmgaLde5s sORG3iFMqaOpTIWNRPlbcZyIlwLa/7gOdIYt28DHjOIJp1iKvteY01Utj5aUzEVLYlAE XB/Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1699827321; x=1700432121; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:references:cc:to :content-language:subject:mime-version:date:message-id :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=/+KrL80b01ymyS/sYD6vnOxTaUkbqq5SmSnkCz6O+UU=; b=Ncjl/pddlaNerz2/gTseQK0x/LfkhO0H/eEt0irwHQ31IeFLoNY2hBuasxQJfW95Td EjO7p4SNIBrD2cHFSzHnTnQ3t0evRH5hAvlOYcUaDhu4D9OXZsZHVRyA0o51aYEgZBpY bKMEDNf6EiGIx2JjpOb1wwUVWfIFFD58NJUeCM8mtUPlU+qvs5OAEPmGlu9lA9lOdLvS vLYm+pXskGjAQ0gqPJKkeQdoz0+lM3V6gHVmpJ9bV48i63EvLIZdNhKnUXui7ynhUJ3H qcvuiG3k3ejimYjBWvIC6sGM54bGKRhjhyv1G1Yo2W1FcQqSjzLVvbmGb9v1ouQuOjdM vgAw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YwlZWMCqf4RcrRc+ohamaiXgZFBHHDaKuBhY2pz7isS+8/1x0l2 /jxvLlDCWAARBFUIdz7nqR8= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IE9dQtNvuNziBT+vKxeuyOl+hStGLDUG+KdCw5BqpoqFMeleb9NXHQ6JzJRLeLQONkFS1eJHw== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6808:3089:b0:3b5:75ec:44fd with SMTP id bl9-20020a056808308900b003b575ec44fdmr7956877oib.13.1699827321145; Sun, 12 Nov 2023 14:15:21 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from [192.168.1.2] (cpe-76-168-148-233.socal.res.rr.com. [76.168.148.233]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id q14-20020a63e20e000000b0056946623d7esm3050101pgh.55.2023.11.12.14.15.20 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Sun, 12 Nov 2023 14:15:20 -0800 (PST) Content-Language: en-US In-Reply-To: <894ab706-20ff-8773-be39-9d4a3c924872@gutov.dev> X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.bugs:274239 Archived-At: On 11/12/2023 12:35 PM, Dmitry Gutov wrote: > On 12/11/2023 21:07, Jim Porter wrote: >> In any case, we don't necessarily need to provide a default >> implementation for the 'short-revision' function. What about something >> like this? I'm not sure it's better, but it does let us avoid defining >> a no-op implementation for the "default backend". > > Looks worse to me than having the default "identity" implementation. > > Sorry. > > Though it might go in anyway, since Eli likes it. I'll do whichever gets the patch merged. While I personally find the no-op implementation for the default backend to be cleaner, doing it the other way doesn't bother me enough that I'll fight for it.