From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.1 (2015-04-28) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.1 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.1 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id C5F6F1F404 for ; Thu, 23 Aug 2018 21:27:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728227AbeHXA7d (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Aug 2018 20:59:33 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com ([64.147.108.71]:51329 "EHLO pb-smtp2.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728212AbeHXA7d (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Aug 2018 20:59:33 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp21.pobox.com (unknown [10.110.30.21]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A510FF59D1; Thu, 23 Aug 2018 17:27:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pb-smtp21.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 086A222325; Thu, 23 Aug 2018 17:27:56 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from kyle@kyleam.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=tC6+kdFSynvxx1Ebe/On96U16TE=; b=KUm9AC g+8lF56Ea2hTkjNWGmbScSbwRcBNBshIAzAiMYDMHuwv8oir2Ts0Apm2OBCwlYd8 +iPnqv4v9NGXOhVb6EXjck8X/oNJbMjKLJMvKanVyDLiEVVmIemmDuU02BMcAaUP glsopODlY+CCekDv+ipFfKPDjkATz0ApBN9HU= Received: from pb-smtp21.sea.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0198922324; Thu, 23 Aug 2018 17:27:56 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from kyle@kyleam.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=kyleam.com; h=from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:mime-version:content-type; s=mesmtp; bh=t+3GL7r7VjEqtrHdAH0HpYWRtanPmONPeLyKxKXzgGk=; b=kzPTcc6VaRjC0kW1IqQRmbV30mFxCEgWmb7K1UPh5PS79Rod8Vc6MuHSG2oyFNw+Yb9GKr1dV71mf37o1L8ARLKXbFkqNIo0+pYEA88VQMr/DMAveu5l3Ybjhaod4THg0Hhjey1EgnyIIpYKt8WjPDGLQf39BILEc6PsW12oxPI= Received: from localhost (unknown [76.118.43.98]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 645A622322; Thu, 23 Aug 2018 17:27:50 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from kyle@kyleam.com) From: Kyle Meyer To: Junio C Hamano , Johannes Schindelin Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Jonathan Nieder Subject: Re: [PATCH] range-diff: update stale summary of --no-dual-color In-Reply-To: References: <20180823023955.12980-1-kyle@kyleam.com> Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2018 17:27:48 -0400 Message-ID: <87pny8wz6z.fsf@kyleam.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 6327102C-A71B-11E8-8765-CC883AD79A78-24757444!pb-smtp21.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Junio C Hamano writes: > Johannes Schindelin writes: [...] >>> - N_("color both diff and diff-between-diffs")), >>> + N_("restrict coloring to outer diff markers")), >> >> How about "use simple diff colors" instead? That's certainly better than the one above, and I also prefer it to "color only based on the diff-between-diffs" in v2. > I am wondering if it makes sense to remove the option altogether. > I've been trying to view the comparison of the same ranges in both > styles for the past few days, and I never found a reason to choose > "no dual color" option myself. But I like this suggestion even better.