Re: [PATCH v2] status: list unmerged files last
- From
- bill lam <cbill.lam@gmail.com>
- Date
- Sep 2, 2009, 00:39 UTC
- Message-ID
- <20090902003940.GA23954@debian.b2j>
- In-Reply-To
- <7vtyzmxkpr.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
On Tue, 01 Sep 2009, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Show 9 quoted lines
> Sadly, "keep related things together" and "as close to the bottom as > possible" are not quite compatible, and we can pick one or the other, but > not both. > > If I were to pick the middle ground, I would probably move it immediately > after the call to wt_status_print_changed(), with "keeping related things > together" as the primary justification. It would be an incidental benefit > that it moves the part slightly closer to the bottom and gives it a better > chance of staying on the screen.
I can only speak of my personal experience that during rebase -i, there is no (or very few) untracked files in the list so that the sequence "modified, unmerged, untracked" is also a good alternative.
(I hope the mail-followup-to is correct this time)
-- regards, ==================================================== GPG key 1024D/4434BAB3 2008-08-24 gpg --keyserver subkeys.pgp.net --recv-keys 4434BAB3