From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: Call Me Gitless Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 15:01:59 -0400 Message-ID: <20080819190159.GB17943@coredump.intra.peff.net> References: <7vfxp2m5w8.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> <7vtzdiklbw.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> <7vy72tit90.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> <20080819175220.GA10142@coredump.intra.peff.net> <20080819184525.GA17691@coredump.intra.peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: Junio C Hamano , Git Mailing List To: Daniel Barkalow X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Aug 19 21:04:13 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 1KVWUR-00025b-EG for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 21:03:35 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753856AbYHSTCE (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Aug 2008 15:02:04 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1756176AbYHSTCD (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Aug 2008 15:02:03 -0400 Received: from peff.net ([208.65.91.99]:2006 "EHLO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753032AbYHSTCB (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Aug 2008 15:02:01 -0400 Received: (qmail 4247 invoked by uid 111); 19 Aug 2008 19:02:00 -0000 Received: from coredump.intra.peff.net (HELO coredump.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.2) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.32) with SMTP; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 15:02:00 -0400 Received: by coredump.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Tue, 19 Aug 2008 15:01:59 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 02:57:04PM -0400, Daniel Barkalow wrote: > Humans being recipients of emails, or humans being the users who typed the > command? Unless you're cut-and-pasting out of a pager (which never works I meant the recipients of the emails. > well for me if it's long enough to include diff headers, context, and some > change), recipients of emails would get what scripts get. (I personnaly do > that as "git diff > temp.patch" and read temp.patch into my mailer; this > doesn't trigger starting a pager, and wouldn't trigger the default to be > informative prefixes.) OK, I didn't read your mail carefully enough. Yes, I do the same thing, so the "do this only if pager" rule would meet my requirement. OTOH, I don't know if that would satisfy the people who want this feature (but I will let them speak for themselves). > Yeah, that's why I think that format-patch should work on content that you > haven't committed, generating something you can dump right into an email > (with the --- and diffstat that you'd get if you actually did commit and > use format-patch now). It's not clear to me: - how you would tell format-patch that's what you wanted to dump - what parts would be included. There's no commit message or author. We could guess at the author as if you were about to commit this. - how this would be any real improvement over "git diff --stat -p". In fact, I like the fact that I get _just_ the diff, which I then paste. The headers would just be clutter I would have to delete. -Peff