Re: git-status too verbose?

[Andreas Ericsson <ae@op5.se>]

Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Andreas Ericsson <ae@op5.se> writes:
> 
> 
>>>I agree that it would be useful if we had a tool that showed the
>>>two status that matter for each file, grouped together on one
>>>line, e.g.
>>>			HEAD->index	index->files
>>>	------------------------------------------------
>>>	hello.c		unmodified      modified
>>>        world.c		modified	unmodified
>>>	frotz.c		new		unmodified
>>>        ...
>>>	garbage.c~	???		n/a
>>>for the current index file and the current HEAD commit.
>>
>>Could we have 'same' or some such instead of 'unmodified'? It's a bit
>>close to 'modified' for the eye to find it quickly.
>>
>>
>>>You obviously need to learn how to read it though.  The first
>>>column means what you _would_ commit if you just said "git
>>>commit" without doing anything else now; the second column is
>>>what you _could_ commit if you did some update-index and then
>>>said "git commit" (or ran "git commit" with paths arguments).
>>
>>Pretty-printing will be easier if the filename is last, and it will
>>look a lot neater if all columns are aligned.
> 
> 
> Somebody who feels strongly about this can propose a design.
> Although I am not particularly fond of the current output, I am
> not volunteering ;-).
> 
> It would be nicer if the proposal was accompanied by a patch,
> but that is not a requirement for discussion.
> 

I'll see if I can get around to it tonight.

> The points that design would address should include:
> 
>    - what to do _if_ we choose to do rename detection?  you need
>      two pathnames.

I like the gitk view of these things, "renamed from" and "renamed to", 
although we'll likely want shorter names since the filename part can't 
start before column max_label_name * 2 + 4 if we assume two spaces 
minimum between word-columns. Perhaps mv-to and mv-from?

-- 
Andreas Ericsson                   andreas.ericsson@op5.se
OP5 AB                             www.op5.se
Tel: +46 8-230225                  Fax: +46 8-230231