Re: [PATCH] Builtin-commit: show on which branch a commit was added

[Jeff King <peff@peff.net>]

On Wed, Oct 01, 2008 at 08:36:37AM -0700, Shawn O. Pearce wrote:

> I briefly considered a format like this while replying above, but
> at prior day-job I used rather long branch names (sometimes with
> common prefixes) so it would truncate alot:
> 
>   normal case
>   On i386           abc9056 (i386: Snib the sprock)

I don't like this purely for the reason that it wastes horizontal space,
which is one of the problems that started this discussion.

Also, there is no verb, which I think is worse. :)

> *sigh*  And I just took up the #@*#@!&!*!@ paintbrush myself.
> Dammit.  I'm putting it down now.  Really.  :-)

Heh. I don't want to stir up trouble or drag you into a discussion you
don't want to be in. But it seems like you are saying "OK, this is
silly, let's just go with what is in next." But I think Andreas raised a
good point about "stuff the user should check should go on the left"
which is not consistent with what is in next. So I just want to confirm
that you either disagree with that, or simply think it is not important
enough to keep the discussion going.

-Peff