From: Gustaf Hendeby <hendeby@isy.liu.se>
To: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Cc: vmiklos@frugalware.org, git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Make git add -n and git -u -n output consistent
Date: Fri, 23 May 2008 10:14:48 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <48367CF8.8040307@isy.liu.se> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7vabihtyxw.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org>
On 05/23/2008 06:40 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Gustaf Hendeby <hendeby@isy.liu.se> writes:
>
>> Signed-off-by: Gustaf Hendeby <hendeby@isy.liu.se>
>> ---
>>
>> This would be one way to go to get a more coherent behavior or the -n
>> switch to git add. It would also unify the implementation somewhat.
>> I'd suggest amending this to your patch, or would the output be likely
>> to be used by scrips? In that case I'd vote for changing the output
>> of git add -n -u,
>
> The commit log message should describe what kind of consistency you are
> talking about to people who are not familiar with the topic.
Point taken, I will try to do better next time.
>
> Output format from "git add -n $path" lists path to blobs that are going
> to be added on a single line, separated with SP. On the other hand, the
> suggested "git add -u -n" shows one path per line, like "add '<file>'\n".
> Of course, these two are inconsistent.
>
> Plain "git add -n" can afford to only say names of paths, as all it does
> is to add (update). However, "git add -u" needs to be able to express
> "remove" somehow. So if we need to have them formatted the same way, we
> need to unify with the "git add -n -u" format. Incidentally, this is
> consistent with how 'update-index' says it.
>
> I do not think we need to worry about people who wrote script around
> output from "git add -n". Output from Porcelain commands is a fair game
> for improvements.
Thanks for the explaination.
/Gustaf
prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-05-23 8:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-05-15 16:08 [BUG] git add -u ignores --dry-run flag Gustaf Hendeby
2008-05-15 16:20 ` [PATCH] Make git add -u honor --dry-run Miklos Vajna
2008-05-15 18:46 ` Gustaf Hendeby
2008-05-15 23:42 ` Re* " Junio C Hamano
2008-05-16 0:13 ` Miklos Vajna
2008-05-19 22:14 ` Gustaf Hendeby
2008-05-22 18:16 ` Junio C Hamano
2008-05-22 19:34 ` Gustaf Hendeby
2008-05-22 20:38 ` Junio C Hamano
2008-05-22 21:12 ` Gustaf Hendeby
2008-05-22 21:59 ` [PATCH] Make git add -n and git -u -n output consistent Gustaf Hendeby
2008-05-23 4:40 ` Junio C Hamano
2008-05-23 8:14 ` Gustaf Hendeby [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=48367CF8.8040307@isy.liu.se \
--to=hendeby@isy.liu.se \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=vmiklos@frugalware.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).