From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: Comments on "status -v" Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2006 13:35:05 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: References: <87slqtcr2f.wl%cworth@cworth.org> <7vfymtl43b.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <7vmzgzy46f.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <87u0b7uf91.wl%cworth@cworth.org> <7vaccyx6ne.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: Carl Worth , git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sat Feb 11 00:12:38 2006 Return-path: Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by deer.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1F7fvB-0004UV-00 for ; Fri, 10 Feb 2006 22:35:17 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750723AbWBJVfO (ORCPT ); Fri, 10 Feb 2006 16:35:14 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751307AbWBJVfN (ORCPT ); Fri, 10 Feb 2006 16:35:13 -0500 Received: from smtp.osdl.org ([65.172.181.4]:41399 "EHLO smtp.osdl.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750723AbWBJVfM (ORCPT ); Fri, 10 Feb 2006 16:35:12 -0500 Received: from shell0.pdx.osdl.net (fw.osdl.org [65.172.181.6]) by smtp.osdl.org (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id k1ALZ6DZ028214 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA bits=168 verify=NO); Fri, 10 Feb 2006 13:35:07 -0800 Received: from localhost (shell0.pdx.osdl.net [10.9.0.31]) by shell0.pdx.osdl.net (8.13.1/8.11.6) with ESMTP id k1ALZ5hx005092; Fri, 10 Feb 2006 13:35:06 -0800 To: Junio C Hamano In-Reply-To: <7vaccyx6ne.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> X-MIMEDefang-Filter: osdl$Revision: 1.129 $ X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.36 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Fri, 10 Feb 2006, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Carl Worth 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