Re: git-status too verbose?

From: Karl Hasselström <kha@treskal.com>
Date: Mar 7, 2006, 09:17 UTC
Message-ID: <20060307091717.GA16645@diana.vm.bytemark.co.uk>
In-Reply-To: <20060307053547.GK6346@always.joy.eth.net>

On 2006-03-07 11:05:47 +0530, Joshua N Pritikin wrote:

Show 12 quoted lines

> On Mon, Mar 06, 2006 at 04:21:52PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
> >                     HEAD->index     index->files
> >     ------------------------------------------------
> >     hello.c         unmodified      modified
> >     world.c         modified        unmodified
> >     frotz.c         new             unmodified
> >         ...
> >     garbage.c~      ???             n/a
>
> For what it's worth, this chart immediately made sense to me and I
> would prefer it to the current git-status output.

I agree. This kind of status information makes the whole index concept an order of magnitude less confusing. In a way, it lets you learn what the index is by example, rather than first having to learn what it is in order to be able to grok the status information.

Fitting this in 80 columns should be a funny excercise, though. :-) I'd suggest printing the filename last:

     HEAD->index  index->files
     ------------------------------------------------
     unmodified   modified      hello.c
     modified     unmodified    world.c
     new          unmodified    frotz.c
         ...
     ???          n/a           garbage.c~

-- 
Karl Hasselström, kha@treskal.com
      www.treskal.com/kalle