From: Shawn Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2006 15:09:09 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH] make commit message a little more consistent and conforting
Message-ID: <20061215150909.GE17860@spearce.org>
In-Reply-To: <45825E0B.5010200@op5.se>

Andreas Ericsson <ae@op5.se> wrote:
> Shawn Pearce wrote:
> >Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org> wrote:
> >>It is nicer to let the user know when a commit succeeded all the time, 
> >>not only the first time.  Also the commit sha1 is much more useful than 
> >>the tree sha1 in this case.
> >
> >I agree the commit sha1 is more useful than the tree sha1, but I'm
> >not really sure its useful to show the commit sha1 post commit.
> >If you want to show something the diffstat like what git merge does
> >is better.
> >
> 
> diffstats can be huge though. I'd rather have those only with -v option.

But they are on by default for pull/merge, and disabled by -n.

They are on to tell you what you just got during the pull/merge.
If we want commit to confirm it did something successfully, I think
having it confirm what it committed by way of diffstat makes a lot
of sense.

Unfortunately -n is taken to mean --no-verify by git-commit, so
we probably cannot repurpose it to mean --no-summary, like it is
for merge/pull.

--