From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Greg KH Subject: Re: [TIG RFC] Cleaning up tig's option handling Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2008 22:30:48 -0800 Message-ID: <20080207063048.GA22148@kroah.com> References: <20080206235734.GA9969@diku.dk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: git@vger.kernel.org To: Jonas Fonseca X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Feb 07 07:28:34 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1JN0FK-0002Pe-U4 for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Thu, 07 Feb 2008 07:28:31 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752907AbYBGG15 (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 Feb 2008 01:27:57 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752998AbYBGG15 (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 Feb 2008 01:27:57 -0500 Received: from pentafluge.infradead.org ([213.146.154.40]:57564 "EHLO pentafluge.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752228AbYBGG14 (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 Feb 2008 01:27:56 -0500 Received: from dsl093-040-174.pdx1.dsl.speakeasy.net ([66.93.40.174] helo=localhost) by pentafluge.infradead.org with esmtpsa (Exim 4.68 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1JN0Ek-0001df-Ab; Thu, 07 Feb 2008 06:27:55 +0000 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080206235734.GA9969@diku.dk> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.16 (2007-06-09) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Thu, Feb 07, 2008 at 12:57:34AM +0100, Jonas Fonseca wrote: > Hello, > > In my own usage of tig, I increasingly use git-log options like -S and > --all and rarely use any of the "native" tig options or subcommands. Same for my usage, and I use tig a lot too. > I would like to ask tig users out there on how to best proceed with > cleaning up the option handling so that tig will act more like gitk. Anything that works more like gitk would be fine with me, no objection to changing the options at all. thanks, greg k-h