From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (lindbergh.monkeyblade.net [23.128.96.19]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2FDDF6FAA for ; Sun, 22 Oct 2023 10:30:20 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=none Received: from bluemchen.kde.org (bluemchen.kde.org [209.51.188.41]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 645E9C9 for ; Sun, 22 Oct 2023 03:30:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ugly.fritz.box (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by bluemchen.kde.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C175223FE5; Sun, 22 Oct 2023 06:30:16 -0400 (EDT) Received: by ugly.fritz.box (masqmail 0.3.6-dev, from userid 1000) id 1quViq-KxP-00; Sun, 22 Oct 2023 12:30:16 +0200 Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2023 12:30:16 +0200 From: Oswald Buddenhagen To: Dragan Simic Cc: Jacob Stopak , git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/5] Introduce -t, --table for status/add commands Message-ID: References: <20231020183947.463882-1-jacob@initialcommit.io> <5fac8607a3c270e06fd610551d7403c7@manjaro.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5fac8607a3c270e06fd610551d7403c7@manjaro.org> On Sun, Oct 22, 2023 at 08:38:19AM +0200, Dragan Simic wrote: >True, but I still think that having git put its thoughts into tables is >actually not helpful. > i'm not convinced that the proposed feature specifically would have helped me, either (i found the index a rather obvious concept once i knew that it's there), but i'm making a general argument here. so: >To be precise, it actually might be helpful, but only to the first >category of users, who will never reach it. I mean, never say never, >but in this case I'm pretty sure it's safe to say it. > well, and i think that you're wrong about that. your categorization is simply wrong, because it assumes an incorrect static model. while for the last decade i've been as much of a git expert as one can reasonably be without being literally obsessed with it or having written much of it, i absolutely *did* start out in your first category (as in, it was forced upon me, while i couldn't have cared less about the specifics - p4 was working well enough (or so i thought)). and i hated this stupid git (it was 2009, and it was much more of a pita for noobs than it is now). i certainly could have used more sensible visualizations at every step - on the command line, because that's where i mostly "live". the second major error in the thinking is that "expert" and "gui user" are mutually exclusive categories. while i do most things on the command line, i would never voluntarily use "add -p" - why should i inflict that pain upon me, when i can simply use git-gui to do the job in a much more visual and freely navigable way? the same goes for "log --graph" vs. gitk, and git's "blame" function vs. qt creator's (or git-gui's, but i don't use it for that). regards