Re: git show and the --quiet option

> 
> On Mon, 2011-05-30 at 11:32 +0200, Carlos Martín Nieto wrote:
> > On Sat, May 28, 2011 at 12:17:40PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> > > Carlos Martín Nieto <cmn@elego.de> writes:
> > > 
> 
> > > How does this patch look?
> > > 
> > > It does not fix "git show master~10 master^..master", but instead of just
> > > hijacking and ignoring the --quiet option like your patch did, it actually
> > > flips the option the user wanted to affect from the command line.
> > 
> > It's fine if that's what we want to do. The reason I blocked --quiet
> > instead of converting it to -s is because it seemed less surprising
> > than passing --quiet and still getting output (if I pass --quiet, I'd
> > expect the application to really be quiet), which doesn't happen in
> > the commands that accept --quiet on purpose. Then again, the log
> > family doesn't make any sense without any output, so if you argue that
> > way, --quiet means "quieter", which makes the interface less
> > consistent, but I don't feel that strongly about it
> 
> There's a lot of stuff out there for which --quiet does not imply
> --silent. I side with Junio on the solution.