From: Will Palmer <wmpalmer@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 02 May 2010 08:50:55 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/5] pretty: make %H/%h/etc respect --abbrev[-commit]
Message-ID: <1272790255.4258.11.camel@walleee>
In-Reply-To: <7vocgzyp1f.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>

On Sat, 2010-05-01 at 20:13 -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> I think it is a good change to make %h follow --abbrev, but %H should stay
> the full length no matter what (otherwise why would anybody use %H not %h?).

I could just as easily say "why would anyone pass --abbrev-commit unless
they actually wanted an abbreviated commit?". Synonyms are confusing,
but ignored parameters sound more confusing to me.

While I disagree that --abbrev-commit should have no effect whatsoever
when %H is involved, I agree that the link between %h and --abbrev is
more solid, so I will split %h respecting --abbrev into a separate
patch.

If the current behaviour is actually intentional, we should at least
update the documentation to say that %H is the "full commit hash",
rather than just the "commit hash".

-- 
-- Will