From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/19] Add git-list-files Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2014 00:42:26 -0500 Message-ID: <20141202054226.GA1948@peff.net> References: <1417337767-4505-1-git-send-email-pclouds@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: git@vger.kernel.org To: =?utf-8?B?Tmd1eeG7hW4gVGjDoWkgTmfhu41j?= Duy X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Dec 02 06:42:32 2014 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 1XvgEI-0001tv-7P for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Tue, 02 Dec 2014 06:42:30 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753194AbaLBFm0 convert rfc822-to-quoted-printable (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Dec 2014 00:42:26 -0500 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([50.56.180.127]:46966 "HELO cloud.peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1751060AbaLBFmZ (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Dec 2014 00:42:25 -0500 Received: (qmail 19762 invoked by uid 102); 2 Dec 2014 05:42:25 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.1) by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with SMTP; Mon, 01 Dec 2014 23:42:25 -0600 Received: (qmail 13105 invoked by uid 107); 2 Dec 2014 05:42:26 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with SMTP; Tue, 02 Dec 2014 00:42:26 -0500 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Tue, 02 Dec 2014 00:42:26 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1417337767-4505-1-git-send-email-pclouds@gmail.com> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Sun, Nov 30, 2014 at 03:55:48PM +0700, Nguy=E1=BB=85n Th=C3=A1i Ng=E1= =BB=8Dc Duy wrote: > This is something else that's been sitting in my tree for a while now= =2E > It adds "git list-files", intended to be aliased as "ls" with your > favourite display options. When I read the subject, I thought "why isn't this called git-ls?". The= n when I read this paragraph, I thought "if the point is for everybody to make their own ls alias, why do we need list-files at all, instead of just adding options to ls-files"? I'll let you decide which (if any) you'd like to answer. :) My guesses: 1. If it were "git-ls", it would stomp on existing aliases people hav= e constructed. 2. If it is a wrapper around ls-files, then the options may be constrained; ls-files already squats on useful options like "-d" (which, if we are matching traditional ls, is more like our "-t"). I somewhat feel like (1) can be mitigated by the fact that your command is what people were probably trying to approximate with their aliases, and that as porcelain it should be very configurable (so they should be able to accomplish the same things as their aliases). But I dunno. I do not have an "ls" alias, so I am biased. :) As a side note, I wonder if it would be sensible to whitelist some commands as porcelain, and allow aliases to override them (either entirely, or just to add-in some options). -Peff