From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Matthieu Moy Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] status: really ignore config with --porcelain Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2013 19:21:37 +0200 Message-ID: References: <1372077912-18625-1-git-send-email-artagnon@gmail.com> <1372077912-18625-2-git-send-email-artagnon@gmail.com> <7vk3ljbh5r.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> <7v1u7rbf9v.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Cc: Ramkumar Ramachandra , Git List To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon Jun 24 19:23:51 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1UrAUW-0001Oj-5Z for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Mon, 24 Jun 2013 19:23:48 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751881Ab3FXRXo (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Jun 2013 13:23:44 -0400 Received: from mx2.imag.fr ([129.88.30.17]:54555 "EHLO rominette.imag.fr" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750964Ab3FXRXn (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Jun 2013 13:23:43 -0400 Received: from mail-veri.imag.fr (mail-veri.imag.fr [129.88.43.52]) by rominette.imag.fr (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r5OHLa5S010551 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 24 Jun 2013 19:21:36 +0200 Received: from anie.imag.fr ([129.88.7.32]) by mail-veri.imag.fr with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1UrASQ-0001Os-9Q; Mon, 24 Jun 2013 19:21:38 +0200 In-Reply-To: <7v1u7rbf9v.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> (Junio C. Hamano's message of "Mon, 24 Jun 2013 10:16:28 -0700") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux) X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.2 (rominette.imag.fr [129.88.30.17]); Mon, 24 Jun 2013 19:21:36 +0200 (CEST) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Junio C Hamano writes: > That means after we add more and more other options like --branch > that enrich the output in several years, scripts that want to use > the enriched data need to pass tons of options to get what they > want, which is not very nice, Right, but accepting status.branch would not even solve that. Script writers should not assume that status.branch is set. So, the --branch is still required. Actually, that would even be worse, as a script writer who's used to status.branch being set would not even notice that --branch is missing. So, he'd still need it, but would have greater chance to miss it. -- Matthieu Moy http://www-verimag.imag.fr/~moy/