From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: Better handling of local changes in 'gitk'? Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2007 14:01:00 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: References: <7vir8ptksi.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <7vejjdtkl0.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=us-ascii Cc: Paul Mackerras , Git Mailing List To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Jul 12 23:02:00 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1I95nK-0004KK-EK for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Thu, 12 Jul 2007 23:01:50 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933610AbXGLVBr (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Jul 2007 17:01:47 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S933501AbXGLVBq (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Jul 2007 17:01:46 -0400 Received: from smtp2.linux-foundation.org ([207.189.120.14]:45779 "EHLO smtp2.linux-foundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933491AbXGLVBp (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Jul 2007 17:01:45 -0400 Received: from imap1.linux-foundation.org (imap1.linux-foundation.org [207.189.120.55]) by smtp2.linux-foundation.org (8.13.5.20060308/8.13.5/Debian-3ubuntu1.1) with ESMTP id l6CL16l2022601 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 12 Jul 2007 14:01:07 -0700 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by imap1.linux-foundation.org (8.13.5.20060308/8.13.5/Debian-3ubuntu1.1) with ESMTP id l6CL10oO002326; Thu, 12 Jul 2007 14:01:00 -0700 In-Reply-To: <7vejjdtkl0.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.614 required=5 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.0-osdl_revision__1.12__ X-MIMEDefang-Filter: osdl$Revision: 1.181 $ X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.53 on 207.189.120.14 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Thu, 12 Jul 2007, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > I just meant that I agree with you that --cc between HEAD, index and the > working tree is a wonderful way to view the current state. Heh. I wasn't thinking of --cc, and if seen as a combination diff, I think --combined would be better (we very much want to see *all* changes, not just the conflicting ones, no?). I was literally meaning two separate diffs, as two separate commits. But yes, I do agree that it might be very interesting to make "git diff-index" know about --combined/--cc in addition to --cached. > It might make sense to teach "git diff" itself to show this > 3-way diff with a new option ("git diff --h-i-w"). The > necessary machinery is already there to handle "git diff maint > master next pu" (four trees!), and "git diff maint:Makefile > master:Makefile next:Makefile" (three blobs). Actually, I think that if you teach "git diff-index" about --combined and --cc, then you'll automatically get it when you just do "git diff HEAD". No? Linus