From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
To: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Cc: Carl Worth <cworth@cworth.org>, git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Comments on "status -v"
Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2006 13:35:05 -0800 (PST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0602101333570.19172@g5.osdl.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7vaccyx6ne.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>
On Fri, 10 Feb 2006, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Carl Worth <cworth@cworth.org> writes:
>
> > 1) I think the patch should come after the traditional status summary,
> > not before. If something is obviously "wrong" (non-updated file,
> > etc.) that will be more obvious in the summary, so it's good to
> > present that up front, and not bury it after the patch, (which
> > might make it initially invisible without scrolling).
>
> Maybe. A time for a quick poll.
I think I agree. Especially if doing "git commit -v", the _top_ of the
status message is what you'd normally be most aware of. I think.
Especially if the patch is large, you'd grow bored looking at it long
before you saw what followed.
Linus
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-02-10 21:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-02-09 0:29 Two crazy proposals for changing git's diff commands Carl Worth
2006-02-09 1:05 ` Linus Torvalds
2006-02-09 1:21 ` Linus Torvalds
2006-02-09 23:07 ` Carl Worth
2006-02-09 23:40 ` Junio C Hamano
2006-02-09 1:35 ` Junio C Hamano
2006-02-09 1:21 ` Junio C Hamano
2006-02-09 1:30 ` Linus Torvalds
2006-02-09 1:37 ` Junio C Hamano
2006-02-10 9:05 ` Junio C Hamano
2006-02-10 20:32 ` Comments on "status -v" (was: Two crazy proposals for changing git's diff commands) Carl Worth
2006-02-10 21:09 ` Comments on "status -v" Junio C Hamano
2006-02-10 21:35 ` Linus Torvalds [this message]
2006-02-10 22:12 ` Junio C Hamano
2006-02-10 22:51 ` Petr Baudis
2006-02-10 23:26 ` Junio C Hamano
2006-02-09 23:44 ` Two crazy proposals for changing git's diff commands Carl Worth
2006-02-10 0:13 ` Junio C Hamano
2006-02-10 1:24 ` Carl Worth
2006-02-10 2:24 ` Junio C Hamano
2006-02-10 3:18 ` Carl Worth
2006-02-10 17:06 ` Mark Wooding
2006-02-13 9:23 ` Catalin Marinas
2006-02-13 22:00 ` Prune-safe StGIT (was Re: Two crazy proposals for changing git's diff commands) Catalin Marinas
2006-02-10 19:36 ` Two crazy proposals for changing git's diff commands Kent Engstrom
2006-02-11 19:25 ` Junio C Hamano
2006-02-12 12:00 ` [PATCH] Add howto about separating topics kent
2006-02-12 3:15 ` Two crazy proposals for changing git's diff commands J. Bruce Fields
2006-02-12 3:48 ` Junio C Hamano
2006-02-09 16:44 ` Tim Larson
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=Pine.LNX.4.64.0602101333570.19172@g5.osdl.org \
--to=torvalds@osdl.org \
--cc=cworth@cworth.org \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=junkio@cox.net \
/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).