From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [PATCH] bash: offer to show (un)staged changes Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 18:13:48 -0800 Message-ID: <7vvdsd1hur.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> References: <1232240184-10906-1-git-send-email-trast@student.ethz.ch> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, "Shawn O. Pearce" To: Thomas Rast X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sun Jan 18 03:15:19 2009 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 1LONC3-0001bO-Cd for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2009 03:15:19 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754685AbZARCNz (ORCPT ); Sat, 17 Jan 2009 21:13:55 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753664AbZARCNz (ORCPT ); Sat, 17 Jan 2009 21:13:55 -0500 Received: from a-sasl-fastnet.sasl.smtp.pobox.com ([207.106.133.19]:63879 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752675AbZARCNy (ORCPT ); Sat, 17 Jan 2009 21:13:54 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by a-sasl-fastnet.sasl.smtp.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8DCCE91664; Sat, 17 Jan 2009 21:13:53 -0500 (EST) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [68.225.240.211]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by a-sasl-fastnet.sasl.smtp.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C2C2291663; Sat, 17 Jan 2009 21:13:49 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <1232240184-10906-1-git-send-email-trast@student.ethz.ch> (Thomas Rast's message of "Sun, 18 Jan 2009 01:56:24 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: A750F278-E505-11DD-8AEB-5720C92D7133-77302942!a-sasl-fastnet.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Thomas Rast writes: > I came up with this after sending two incomplete patches on the same > night, and really like it. Perhaps others might find it useful. Any patch worth discussing (on this list at least) would need a nontrivial commit log message that you need to really think while writing. It is natural to assume people would be making them with their editor, not with "commit -m". These two incomplete patches could have been avoided if you paid attention to the status output that is in the commit log message buffer. Perhaps we should make it even louder in some way?