From 03255dcae47237af3e5f8ad6edcec481c1808c04 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: dxld Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2020 19:28:34 +0000 Subject: [PATCH 1/2] Added a comment --- ..._2_db82f6c4a27ac8ee862b5aaa45670085._comment | 17 +++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+) create mode 100644 doc/bugs/git_config_merge.ff__61__only_breaks_sync/comment_2_db82f6c4a27ac8ee862b5aaa45670085._comment diff --git a/doc/bugs/git_config_merge.ff__61__only_breaks_sync/comment_2_db82f6c4a27ac8ee862b5aaa45670085._comment b/doc/bugs/git_config_merge.ff__61__only_breaks_sync/comment_2_db82f6c4a27ac8ee862b5aaa45670085._comment new file mode 100644 index 0000000000..337e648c09 --- /dev/null +++ b/doc/bugs/git_config_merge.ff__61__only_breaks_sync/comment_2_db82f6c4a27ac8ee862b5aaa45670085._comment @@ -0,0 +1,17 @@ +[[!comment format=mdwn + username="dxld" + avatar="http://cdn.libravatar.org/avatar/742547a848e15c9f7fb381191c239141" + subject="comment 2" + date="2020-01-21T19:28:29Z" + content=""" +Honestly I feel like the (perceived) semantics of sync are broken by this behaviour. I would expect git-annex to do what it has to to make what I asked for happen. + +I agree that in general it's a good thing not to needlessly override git settings but for the sync command I really don't see any way that not merging can be considered sensible behaviour. To me as a user it just feels like I changed a setting completely unrelated to git-annex-sync and suddenly sync broke. + +Consider this: the git-annex-sync(1) man page never actually mentions that it will run git-merge. On the other hand git-pull(1) is very forthcoming with the fact that it's just a shorthand for `git fetch; git merge` so it's obvious to me that settings affecting merge will affect git-pull, not so for sync. + +I've been unable to sync my git-annex repos for a couple of months now because of this issue so firmly believe this is a serious usabiliy issue. + +At the very least we have a documentation issue here. Though I would still argue the behaviour is bonkers :) + +"""]] From 0a9be3da306fef12d0046261311e972f6daefbab Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: "eschwartz@5abb721e66990e478c7d1caf96beb4f9794eb168" Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2020 05:33:08 +0000 Subject: [PATCH 2/2] New bug for fish-completion --- ...rrect_install_dir_for_fish_completion.mdwn | 37 +++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 37 insertions(+) create mode 100644 doc/bugs/Incorrect_install_dir_for_fish_completion.mdwn diff --git a/doc/bugs/Incorrect_install_dir_for_fish_completion.mdwn b/doc/bugs/Incorrect_install_dir_for_fish_completion.mdwn new file mode 100644 index 0000000000..9c12d5a8ff --- /dev/null +++ b/doc/bugs/Incorrect_install_dir_for_fish_completion.mdwn @@ -0,0 +1,37 @@ +### Please describe the problem. + +[git-annex Makefile: install-completions](http://source.git-annex.branchable.com/?p=source.git;a=blob;f=Makefile;h=965f53e1fc4a8f6d69041eabaccd759268f6490f;hb=HEAD#l87) + +git-annex installs fish completions to the wrong directory. `$(SHAREDIR)/fish/completions` is the directory documented as being exclusive to completions which are shipped in the fish source code; third-party applications installing their own completions are intended to use `$(SHAREDIR)/fish/vendor_completions.d` instead. + +See [https://fishshell.com/docs/current/index.html#completion-path](https://fishshell.com/docs/current/index.html#completion-path) + +Note that this location can also be obtained in a similar manner to bash-completion: + +``` +$ pkg-config bash-completion --variable=completionsdir +/usr/share/bash-completion/completions +``` + +``` +$ pkg-config fish --variable=completionsdir +/usr/share/fish/vendor_completions.d +``` + +### What steps will reproduce the problem? + +Run "make install-completions", or install a linux distribution package of git-annex that builds with the current Makefile (Arch Linux or Debian will both show the same issue). + +### What version of git-annex are you using? On what operating system? + +Arch Linux + +git-annex 7.20191230-7 + +### Please provide any additional information below. + +Apparently this is a very common mistake :/ so far I've seen many more projects do this wrong than do it right. + +### Have you had any luck using git-annex before? (Sometimes we get tired of reading bug reports all day and a lil' positive end note does wonders) + +Not a user, just here to help improve cross-distro packaging. :)