Add new baseline-diff command by autoantwort · Pull Request #1980 · microsoft/vcpkg-tool

autoantwort · 2026-04-08T09:40:55Z

If we use x-update-baseline we wanted to know which packages gets updated for our manifest file.

Copilot

Pull request overview

This PR introduces a new experimental x-baseline-diff command to help users understand which manifest dependencies would change when moving between two baselines (commit refs), integrating it into the vcpkg command dispatcher and localization system.

Changes:

Adds x-baseline-diff command implementation and registers it in command dispatch.
Extends configuration with a helper intended to detect whether the default registry is the built-in registry.
Adds new localized strings for command synopsis/output headings and “no change” output.

Reviewed changes

Copilot reviewed 7 out of 7 changed files in this pull request and generated 12 comments.

Show a summary per file

File	Description
`src/vcpkg/configuration.cpp`	Adds a helper intended to detect built-in default registry kind (currently incorrect).
`include/vcpkg/configuration.h`	Exposes the new configuration helper in the public header.
`src/vcpkg/commands.cpp`	Wires the new command into the command table (currently has a syntax error in the include).
`src/vcpkg/commands.baseline-diff.cpp`	Implements the baseline comparison by generating two install plans and diffing versions.
`include/vcpkg/commands.baseline-diff.h`	Declares the new command entrypoint/metadata.
`locales/messages.json`	Adds user-facing strings for the command and output labels (some grammar issues).
`include/vcpkg/base/message-data.inc.h`	Declares new messages for localization enforcement (some grammar issues).

If we use x-update-baseline we wanted to know which packages gets updated for our manifest file.

Copilot

Pull request overview

Copilot reviewed 6 out of 6 changed files in this pull request and generated 4 comments.

BillyONeal · 2026-04-15T00:34:20Z

+        return false;
+    }
+
+    void check_for_valid_sha(StringView sha)


Can this use check_commit_exists (from git.h) instead?

I see we can't do that in the general case because this kinda just blindly overwrites the baseline with a SHA and we don't necessarily have a git repo present for that.

However that makes this kinda broken because filesystem registries' baselines are not SHAs. We should only be checking that the input is a SHA when we know that registry has that constraint.

BillyONeal

I think the general idea of such a command makes sense.

Most of what is here is nitpicks but the one about 'why manifest only' and 'what about non-git registries' are kinda foundational.

Should we have output like this printed by x-update-baseline instead of/in addition to what you've done here?

This needs at least one end to end test.

Thanks for the new command submission!

BillyONeal · 2026-04-15T00:40:49Z

+        check_for_valid_sha(options.command_arguments.at(0));
+        check_for_valid_sha(options.command_arguments.at(1));


Suggested change

check_for_valid_sha(options.command_arguments.at(0));

check_for_valid_sha(options.command_arguments.at(1));

check_for_valid_sha(options.command_arguments[0]);

check_for_valid_sha(options.command_arguments[1]);

BillyONeal · 2026-04-15T00:41:54Z

+        {
+            if (auto default_reg = configuration.config.default_reg.get())
+            {
+                default_reg->baseline = options.command_arguments.at(i);


Suggested change

default_reg->baseline = options.command_arguments.at(i);

default_reg->baseline = options.command_arguments[i];

BillyONeal · 2026-04-15T00:42:54Z

+        auto dependencies = get_manifest_dependencies(*manifest_scf, features);
+
+        ActionPlan plan[2];
+        for (int i = 0; i < 2; ++i)


Suggested change

for (int i = 0; i < 2; ++i)

for (size_t i = 0; i < 2; ++i)

to avoid any sugned/unsigned mismatch warnings from vector.

BillyONeal · 2026-04-15T00:45:30Z

+        msgCmdBaselineDiffSynopsis,
+        {"vcpkg x-baseline-diff <old_commit_sha> <newer_commit_sha>",
+         "vcpkg x-baseline-diff $(git rev-parse 2026.02.27) $(git rev-parse 2026.03.18)"},
+        Undocumented,


I think we need a docs page for this.

BillyONeal · 2026-04-15T00:46:23Z

+            {
+                RegistryConfig synthesized_registry;
+                synthesized_registry.kind = JsonIdBuiltin.to_string();
+                synthesized_registry.baseline = options.command_arguments.at(i);


Suggested change

synthesized_registry.baseline = options.command_arguments.at(i);

synthesized_registry.baseline = options.command_arguments[i];

BillyONeal · 2026-04-15T00:50:27Z

+                                        Triplet host_triplet)
+    {
+        const auto* manifest = paths.get_manifest();
+        if (manifest == nullptr)


I'm not sure I agree with this design: Because the user is explicitly passing in multiple baseline SHAs, it seems to really be more of a classic mode command as other registries aren't accounted for.

It seems like what you actually wanted is effectively this same diff but before/after what x-update-baseline does?

If this stays manifest only, it seems like one of the SHAs should be the one already in the manifest?

It seems like what you actually wanted is effectively this same diff but before/after what x-update-baseline does?

Yes. I wanted to know what x-update-baseline does mean to me in terms of port versions, or what it would mean.

If this stays manifest only, it seems like one of the SHAs should be the one already in the manifest?

At least if there is no second one. You are right, this would be more developer friendly.

BillyONeal · 2026-04-15T00:51:47Z

+        return false;
+    }
+
+    void check_for_valid_sha(StringView sha)


I see we can't do that in the general case because this kinda just blindly overwrites the baseline with a SHA and we don't necessarily have a git repo present for that.

However that makes this kinda broken because filesystem registries' baselines are not SHAs. We should only be checking that the input is a SHA when we know that registry has that constraint.

BillyONeal

(paraphrased by @BillyONeal )
@vicroms: Anything that makes baselines more helpful and less obscure is a good thing
@AugP: This concept sounds like a good idea and I have no objections to it

Apply the print_lines nitpicks.

Copilot AI review requested due to automatic review settings April 8, 2026 09:40

Copilot started reviewing on behalf of autoantwort April 8, 2026 09:41 View session

autoantwort force-pushed the feature/baseline-diff branch 2 times, most recently from 04a5e7a to 9d4ae6d Compare April 8, 2026 09:47

Copilot AI reviewed Apr 8, 2026

View reviewed changes

autoantwort force-pushed the feature/baseline-diff branch from 9d4ae6d to a9849db Compare April 8, 2026 09:54

Add new baseline-diff command

4a51845

If we use x-update-baseline we wanted to know which packages gets updated for our manifest file.

Copilot AI review requested due to automatic review settings April 8, 2026 10:14

autoantwort force-pushed the feature/baseline-diff branch from a9849db to 4a51845 Compare April 8, 2026 10:14

Copilot started reviewing on behalf of autoantwort April 8, 2026 10:15 View session

Copilot AI reviewed Apr 8, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread src/vcpkg/commands.baseline-diff.cpp

Comment thread src/vcpkg/commands.baseline-diff.cpp

Comment thread src/vcpkg/commands.baseline-diff.cpp

Comment thread src/vcpkg/commands.baseline-diff.cpp

BillyONeal reviewed Apr 15, 2026

View reviewed changes

BillyONeal requested changes Apr 15, 2026

View reviewed changes

Apply the print_lines nitpicks.

93cc331

BillyONeal reviewed Apr 15, 2026

View reviewed changes

Merge pull request #2 from BillyONeal/pr-1980-baseline-diff

650a931

Apply the print_lines nitpicks.

		check_for_valid_sha(options.command_arguments.at(0));
		check_for_valid_sha(options.command_arguments.at(1));

	default_reg->baseline = options.command_arguments.at(i);
	default_reg->baseline = options.command_arguments[i];

	synthesized_registry.baseline = options.command_arguments.at(i);
	synthesized_registry.baseline = options.command_arguments[i];

Conversation

autoantwort commented Apr 8, 2026

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Pull request overview

Reviewed changes

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Pull request overview

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

BillyONeal left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

BillyONeal left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

3 participants