From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [PATCH] ls-tree: add --abbrev[=] option Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2006 09:56:24 -0800 Message-ID: <7vzmk2jfzr.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> References: <20060307135202.GA17891@localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Mar 07 18:56:37 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FGgQD-0003cE-GC for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Tue, 07 Mar 2006 18:56:33 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751424AbWCGR40 (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Mar 2006 12:56:26 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751445AbWCGR40 (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Mar 2006 12:56:26 -0500 Received: from fed1rmmtao03.cox.net ([68.230.241.36]:48349 "EHLO fed1rmmtao03.cox.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751424AbWCGR4Z (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Mar 2006 12:56:25 -0500 Received: from assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net ([68.4.9.127]) by fed1rmmtao03.cox.net (InterMail vM.6.01.05.02 201-2131-123-102-20050715) with ESMTP id <20060307175450.FUYA20875.fed1rmmtao03.cox.net@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>; Tue, 7 Mar 2006 12:54:50 -0500 To: Eric Wong In-Reply-To: <20060307135202.GA17891@localdomain> (Eric Wong's message of "Tue, 7 Mar 2006 05:52:02 -0800") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110004 (No Gnus v0.4) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Output from ls-tree and ls-files -s are primarily for script consumption. diff-raw output which already has abbrev is also primarily for scripts, but we have an excuse there that human eyes can spot differences easier in abbreviated form and two values on the same row being different is the only information we are conveying in "git whatchanged" default output, and not abbreviating the object names makes pathnames pushed to far right of the display which will be chopped by "less -S". So I am not quite sure if I should take this, and a subsequent one you would probably send for ls-files ;-). Care to point out a use case I might have missed that this is useful? I've never done ls-tree to be read by _me_ (not by script) unless I am debugging ls-tree itself. Although I doubt this adds much practical value, this might make things consistent, which by itself might be a reason to do this, though.