GNU bug report logs - #65763
Error opening a file from a Git working directory if Git is not installed

Previous Next

Full log

Message #44 received at 65763 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Dmitry Gutov <dmitry <at> gutov.dev>
Cc: 65763 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, pogonyshev <at> gmail.com
Subject: Re: bug#65763: Error opening a file from a Git working directory if
 Git is not installed
Date: Wed, 06 Sep 2023 18:46:54 +0300

> Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2023 17:31:05 +0300
> Cc: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>, 65763 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> From: Dmitry Gutov <dmitry <at> gutov.dev>
> 
> On 06/09/2023 16:11, Paul Pogonyshev wrote:
> > Also consider this from a user point of view. Let's say I have nothing 
> > to do with programming at all and don't have Git installed. Someone 
> > emails me a cool Emacs package as a tarball and accidentally archives 
> > `.git' along, because he is a developer. I unpack it, open some file and 
> > now my Emacs warns me that Git is not installed. But why? I didn't even 
> > ask it to do anything. It /itself/ decided to do something (because it 
> > saw a `.git' directory), failed (Git is not installed), and now warns 
> > /me/. From my point of view, if there is a failure for action that 
> > wasn't direct result of user order, Emacs should stay silent.
> 
> There was a previous discussion on this on the bug tracker which I can't 
> find now. If someone is more able than me, it would be a welcome help.
> 
> I think Lars was involved, and the general argument was that if .git is 
> present, the user is plausibly interested in using our VC features and 
> might not understand which programs might be needed to be installed for 
> that to work. Or just forget about that aspect e.g. on a new machine. So 
> we help them with those warnings.
> 
> > In other words, I think there are two sane options here:
> > 
> > 1) Simply check if Git is installed before doing anything Git-related 
> > from `find-file-hook' callback. If it is not installed, just silently 
> > don't do anything. Reserve errors and warnings until the user actually 
> > ask you to do something Git-related, not simply to open a file.
> 
> I don't mind this solution as well, and it has its logic.
> 
> So if others like this approach we could do such change (roughly, we'd 
> need to capture errors in all 'registered' functions at least, reraise 
> as vc-backend-program-missing, and then catch them -- and only them -- 
> silently at the top level).

I prefer to emit the messages, just make them more user-friendly
("searching for program" "no such file or directory" is not very
friendly, IMO), and suppress the error signaling even when
debug-on-error is non-nil.  The reason is simple: we are talking only
about Git not being installed or accessible here, but the problems
could be different and more obscure: Git could be present but
inoperable for some weird misconfiguration reason, or some other
problem could happen.  So "if it is not installed, just silently don't
do anything" is not a complete solution, and the "silently" part loses
information which users may wish to have presented to them.

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.