* Usage of git whatchanged
@ 2025-09-14 12:48 Bjoern Bastian
2025-09-14 13:10 ` Kristoffer Haugsbakk
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Bjoern Bastian @ 2025-09-14 12:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: git
Hello,
I still use 'git whatchanged' that has been available for a long time
and though being longer than 'git log --raw' is much quicker to type,
as 'git wh' is already sufficient for syntax completion. Obviously,
for this reason I won't use it with the '--i-still-use-this' option.
Best regards,
Björn Bastian
--
Physicist
Wilhelm Ostwald Institute for Physical Chemistry, Leizig, Germany
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: Usage of git whatchanged
2025-09-14 12:48 Usage of git whatchanged Bjoern Bastian
@ 2025-09-14 13:10 ` Kristoffer Haugsbakk
[not found] ` <aMbIqD4c5JY60fK1@eismeer>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Kristoffer Haugsbakk @ 2025-09-14 13:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Bjoern Bastian, git
Hi
On Sun, Sep 14, 2025, at 14:48, Bjoern Bastian wrote:
> I still use 'git whatchanged' that has been available for a long time
> and though being longer than 'git log --raw' is much quicker to type,
> as 'git wh' is already sufficient for syntax completion. Obviously,
> for this reason I won't use it with the '--i-still-use-this' option.
`git log --raw --no-merged` is the closest equivalent.
What if you made a `wh` alias?
wh = log --raw --no-merged
--
Kristoffer Haugsbakk
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: Usage of git whatchanged
[not found] ` <aMbIqD4c5JY60fK1@eismeer>
@ 2025-09-14 17:58 ` Kristoffer Haugsbakk
[not found] ` <aMcYrG3XBZc9Yu_L@eismeer>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Kristoffer Haugsbakk @ 2025-09-14 17:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Bjoern Bastian; +Cc: git
On Sun, Sep 14, 2025, at 15:52, Bjoern Bastian wrote:
> Hi Kristoffer,
>
> I simply followed the invitation printed upon `git whatchanged` to
> join in giving feedback from those who frequently use the command.
>
> I did not expect a thoughtful reply, so thank you very much for it!
>
>> `git log --raw --no-merged` is the closest equivalent.
>
> Thanks for pointing this out, true (actually `--no-merges`).
Yep.
>
>> What if you made a `wh` alias?
>>
>> wh = log --raw --no-merges
>
> Sure an alias will be the next obvious workaround. With bash I need to
> include `git ` though and just type `wh` on the command line which is
> okay. To get `git wh` I could maybe modify the bash completion.
You can also make a Git alias.
git config set --global alias.wh 'log --raw --no-merges'
> One can live without, but the statement "whatchanged is not even shorter
> to type than log --raw." on https://git-scm.com/docs/git-whatchanged is
> a weak one
I have a proposal to remove it.
> that misses obvious use cases of `whatchanged`.
The thing with git-whatchanged is that it uses the same underlying
machinery as git-log. So there’s nothing that git-whatchanged can do
that git-log cannot do.
... and I guess vice versa. But historically git-log ended up as the
new-and-better replacement (according to the devs) with git-whatchanged
being kept around for people who was used to typing it.
--
Kristoffer Haugsbakk
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: Usage of git whatchanged
[not found] ` <aMcYrG3XBZc9Yu_L@eismeer>
@ 2025-09-14 19:44 ` Kristoffer Haugsbakk
0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Kristoffer Haugsbakk @ 2025-09-14 19:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Bjoern Bastian; +Cc: git
On Sun, Sep 14, 2025, at 21:34, Bjoern Bastian wrote:
> Hi Kristoffer,
>
>> You can also make a Git alias.
>>
>> git config set --global alias.wh 'log --raw --no-merges'
>
> neat, thank you, I never noticed the Git aliases. I'll do that.
>
>> > One can live without, but the statement "whatchanged is not even shorter
>> > to type than log --raw." on https://git-scm.com/docs/git-whatchanged is
>> > a weak one
>>
>> I have a proposal to remove it.
>
> Makes sense to me.
>
>> > that misses obvious use cases of `whatchanged`.
>>
>> The thing with git-whatchanged is that it uses the same underlying
>> machinery as git-log. So there’s nothing that git-whatchanged can do
>> that git-log cannot do.
>>
>> ... and I guess vice versa. But historically git-log ended up as the
>> new-and-better replacement (according to the devs) with git-whatchanged
>> being kept around for people who was used to typing it.
>
> Knowing Git aliases, there is actually no reason to keep `whatchanged`.
> Without the idea to enforce `--i-still-use-this` in the transition time,
> this would allow users to continue with their habits if they like to.
Sure, you can use something like that `wh` alias.
But note that you cannot make an alias like this named simply
`whatchanged` (the same name as the command):
git config set --global alias.whatchanged 'log --raw --no-merges'
(in order to continue with the same habits exactly, verbatim)
Because you cannot currently make an alias that has the same name as a
command like this one. But it looks like that restriction will be
lifted for deprecated commands in a future version.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2025-09-14 19:44 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2025-09-14 12:48 Usage of git whatchanged Bjoern Bastian
2025-09-14 13:10 ` Kristoffer Haugsbakk
[not found] ` <aMbIqD4c5JY60fK1@eismeer>
2025-09-14 17:58 ` Kristoffer Haugsbakk
[not found] ` <aMcYrG3XBZc9Yu_L@eismeer>
2025-09-14 19:44 ` Kristoffer Haugsbakk
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox