From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: What's cooking in git.git (Dec 2010, #01; Sat, 4) Date: Sun, 5 Dec 2010 02:39:39 -0500 Message-ID: <20101205073938.GB15233@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <7voc90wx36.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: Aleksi Aalto , git@vger.kernel.org To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sun Dec 05 08:40:45 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PP9D9-0002Nz-77 for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Sun, 05 Dec 2010 08:40:43 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753642Ab0LEHjn (ORCPT ); Sun, 5 Dec 2010 02:39:43 -0500 Received: from xen6.gtisc.gatech.edu ([143.215.130.70]:45093 "EHLO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753386Ab0LEHjn (ORCPT ); Sun, 5 Dec 2010 02:39:43 -0500 Received: (qmail 2636 invoked by uid 111); 5 Dec 2010 07:39:41 -0000 Received: from 99-108-226-0.lightspeed.iplsin.sbcglobal.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (99.108.226.0) (smtp-auth username relayok, mechanism cram-md5) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.40) with ESMTPA; Sun, 05 Dec 2010 07:39:41 +0000 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Sun, 05 Dec 2010 02:39:39 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <7voc90wx36.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Sat, Dec 04, 2010 at 10:30:21PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > * aa/status-hilite-branch (2010-11-18) 1 commit > - status: show branchname with a configurable color > > I am indifferent/uninterested; I don't see anything wrong with it, but I > do not find coloring the field particularly useful myself. I am not particularly interested, either, but FWIW, the gitcommit syntax highlighting that ships with vim does highlight this, so there are at least other people who think this is a good idea. However, I'm not sure about the default. The original patch defaulted to magenta. Your fixup defaults to "plain", but that is a regression (albeit a minor one) for people who have status.header set. I think the correct default is "the same as status.header", but that is sadly not trivial to implement because of the way we parse and store colors. I don't know if it is worth holding up the patch. It is only a regression to the user's eyes, and it is reasonably easy for them to tweak their config. -Peff