Re: New feature discussion: git rebase --status

[Antoine Pelisse <apelisse@gmail.com>]

On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 1:23 PM, Mathieu Liénard--Mayor
<mathieu.lienard--mayor@ensimag.fr> wrote:
> Le 2013-06-12 13:12, Célestin Matte a écrit :
>
>> Le 12/06/2013 12:17, Mathieu Liénard--Mayor a écrit :
>>>
>>> Now, I'm not sure if we should always display the list of commits
>>> already applied and those left to apply. What I mean is that maybe it
>>> would be better to make status require a flag to display the two lists.
>>> Something like (not sure about the flag's name):
>>>
>>> $ git status --rebase-state
>>> # HEAD detached from ecb9f3e
>>> # Already applied 2 patches:
>>> #     b170635... my_commit_message
>>> #     b170635... my_commit_message
>>> # You are currently editing a832578... my_commit_message [3/5] while
>>> rebasing.
>>> # 2 patches left to apply:
>>> #    b170635... my_commit_message
>>> #    b170635... my_commit_message
>>> #   (use "git commit --amend" to amend the current commit)
>>> #   (use "git rebase --continue" once you are satisfied with your
>>> changes)
>>> # ......
>>> # ......
>>>
>>> What do you guys think ?
>>
>>
>> I agree. When you're in the process of rebasing a big list of commits,
>> it would produce a lot of not-so-useful output, when what you want to
>> see is, most of the time, which commit you are currently editing.
>> So, in my opinion, whole lists should not be displayed by default.

Maybe we can display previous and next commits to provide some
context. Like we do for diff.
For example:

$ git status
# HEAD detached from ecb9f3e
# Already applied 330 patches (displaying next 3):
#     b170635... my_commit_message
#     b170635... my_commit_message
#     b170635... my_commit_message
# Already applied 119 (displaying last 3)
#     b170635... my_commit_message
#     b170635... my_commit_message
#     b170635... my_commit_message
# You are currently editing a832578... my_commit_message [120/450]
while rebasing.

Also, I'm not sure about the "--rebase-state" flag. We should probably
have some option to disable it (and re-enable if the default is
changed through a config variable), but my understanding from previous
messages was that not having to learn a new option to use that was
quite important. As a consequence, I removed it from my example.