{"thread":{"id":"53729","subject":"[PATCH] bash-completion: add git-prune into bash completion","startedAt":"2020-06-22T00:14:01Z","lastAt":"2020-07-10T23:08:34Z","messageCount":4,"participants":["John Lin via GitGitGadget","Junio C Hamano","林自均"],"isPatch":true,"patchVersion":1,"patchTotal":null},"messages":[{"id":"400273","messageId":"pull.667.git.1592784835441.gitgitgadget@gmail.com","threadId":"53729","inReplyTo":null,"subject":"[PATCH] bash-completion: add git-prune into bash completion","fromName":"John Lin via GitGitGadget","fromEmail":"gitgitgadget@gmail.com","sentAt":"2020-06-22T00:13:55Z","receivedAt":"2020-06-22T00:14:01Z","isPatch":true,"sender":{"key":"johnlinp@gmail.com","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/1290376?v=4"},"body":"From: John Lin \n\nSometimes git would suggest the user to run `git prune` when there are\ntoo many unreachable loose objects. It's more user-friendly if we add\ngit-prune into bash completion.\n\nSigned-off-by: John Lin \n---\n bash-completion: add git-prune into bash completion\n \n Sometimes git would suggest the user to run git prune when there are too\n many unreachable loose objects. It's more user-friendly if we add\n git-prune into bash completion.\n \n Signed-off-by: John Lin johnlinp@gmail.com [johnlinp@gmail.com]\n \n Fixes #642.\n\nPublished-As: https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git/releases/tag/pr-667%2Fjohnlinp%2Fadd-git-prune-bash-completion-v1\nFetch-It-Via: git fetch https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git pr-667/johnlinp/add-git-prune-bash-completion-v1\nPull-Request: https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git/pull/667\n\n command-list.txt | 2 +-\n 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)\n\ndiff --git a/command-list.txt b/command-list.txt\nindex cbb960c8436..89aa60cde7e 100644\n--- a/command-list.txt\n+++ b/command-list.txt\n@@ -136,7 +136,7 @@ git-pack-redundant plumbinginterrogators\n git-pack-refs ancillarymanipulators\n git-parse-remote synchelpers\n git-patch-id purehelpers\n-git-prune ancillarymanipulators\n+git-prune ancillarymanipulators complete\n git-prune-packed plumbingmanipulators\n git-pull mainporcelain remote\n git-push mainporcelain remote\n\nbase-commit: 101b3204f37606972b40fc17dec84560c22f69f6\n-- \ngitgitgadget\n"},{"id":"400305","messageId":"xmqq366ndkey.fsf@gitster.c.googlers.com","threadId":"53729","inReplyTo":"pull.667.git.1592784835441.gitgitgadget@gmail.com","subject":"Re: [PATCH] bash-completion: add git-prune into bash completion","fromName":"Junio C Hamano","fromEmail":"gitster@pobox.com","sentAt":"2020-06-22T18:28:53Z","receivedAt":"2020-06-22T18:28:59Z","isPatch":true,"sender":{"key":"gitster@pobox.com","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/54884?v=4"},"body":"\"John Lin via GitGitGadget\" writes:\n\n> From: John Lin \n>\n> Sometimes git would suggest the user to run `git prune` when there are\n> too many unreachable loose objects. It's more user-friendly if we add\n> git-prune into bash completion.\n\nYes, but it does not suggest all the time, and there is a reason.\nMost of the time \"gc\" is more appropriate, but there are narrow\ncases where \"prune\" is more appropriate and that is when the users\nwill see suggestion to run \"prune\".\n\nIsn't it too much to type p-r-u-n-e while seeing that message,\ntyping as you read it?\n\nI do not think it hurts to complete \"git prune\", in the sense that\nwe would want to avoid completing potentially destructive operation\nto those who do not understand the implications, because the command\nis pretty much benign. But I am not sure it forces users to type\ntoo many keystrokes too frequently that it requires a tab\ncompletion. I dunno.\n\nWill queue for now.\n\nThanks.\n"},{"id":"401280","messageId":"CAKO26MsKK5Eu=aNtOkMr3v_VBm_TR8_vZOFz=fNMzax8RxntYQ@mail.gmail.com","threadId":"53729","inReplyTo":"xmqq366ndkey.fsf@gitster.c.googlers.com","subject":"Re: [PATCH] bash-completion: add git-prune into bash completion","fromName":"林自均","fromEmail":"johnlinp@gmail.com","sentAt":"2020-07-10T01:18:35Z","receivedAt":"2020-07-10T01:18:48Z","isPatch":true,"sender":{"key":"johnlinp@gmail.com","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/1290376?v=4"},"body":"Hi Junio,\n\nI saw this integrated into master. Thanks.\n\nBest,\nJohn Lin\n\nJunio C Hamano 於 2020年6月23日 週二 上午2:28寫道：\n>\n> \"John Lin via GitGitGadget\" writes:\n>\n> > From: John Lin \n> >\n> > Sometimes git would suggest the user to run `git prune` when there are\n> > too many unreachable loose objects. It's more user-friendly if we add\n> > git-prune into bash completion.\n>\n> Yes, but it does not suggest all the time, and there is a reason.\n> Most of the time \"gc\" is more appropriate, but there are narrow\n> cases where \"prune\" is more appropriate and that is when the users\n> will see suggestion to run \"prune\".\n>\n> Isn't it too much to type p-r-u-n-e while seeing that message,\n> typing as you read it?\n>\n> I do not think it hurts to complete \"git prune\", in the sense that\n> we would want to avoid completing potentially destructive operation\n> to those who do not understand the implications, because the command\n> is pretty much benign. But I am not sure it forces users to type\n> too many keystrokes too frequently that it requires a tab\n> completion. I dunno.\n>\n> Will queue for now.\n>\n> Thanks.\n"},{"id":"401392","messageId":"xmqqy2nrq87l.fsf@gitster.c.googlers.com","threadId":"53729","inReplyTo":"CAKO26MsKK5Eu=aNtOkMr3v_VBm_TR8_vZOFz=fNMzax8RxntYQ@mail.gmail.com","subject":"Re: [PATCH] bash-completion: add git-prune into bash completion","fromName":"Junio C Hamano","fromEmail":"gitster@pobox.com","sentAt":"2020-07-10T23:08:30Z","receivedAt":"2020-07-10T23:08:34Z","isPatch":true,"sender":{"key":"gitster@pobox.com","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/54884?v=4"},"body":"林自均 writes:\n\n> Hi Junio,\n>\n> I saw this integrated into master. Thanks.\n\nThank you for writing the patch.\n"}]}