Re: What's cooking in git.git (Aug 2014, #01; Fri, 1)

From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Date: Aug 6, 2014, 08:11 UTC
Message-ID: <20140806081102.GA1646@peff.net>
In-Reply-To: <xmqqy4v7uax0.fsf@gitster.dls.corp.google.com>

On Fri, Aug 01, 2014 at 03:01:31PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:

Show 12 quoted lines

> * jk/stash-list-p (2014-07-30) 7 commits
>  - SQUASH??? future-proof, log --cc should imply -p without being told
>  - stash: show combined diff with "stash show"
>  - stash: default listing to "--cc --simplify-combined-diff"
>  - add --simplify-combined-diff option
>  - pretty: make empty userformats truly empty
>  - pretty: treat "--format=" as an empty userformat
>  - revision: drop useless string offset when parsing "--pretty"
> 
>  Teach "git stash list -p" to DWIM to "git stash list -p --cc", with
>  even nicer twist to collapse combined diff from identical two
>  parents into a regular diff.

What do you want to do with this topic?

I think we want to drop the "stash show" patch, based on the discussion we had. The first three patches are nominally prep for that final patch, but actually are things I've often wanted over the years. I'd be glad if they made it in separately, but there were some compatibility questions.

As clever as I find the --simplify-combined-diff patch, I think we came to the conclusion that "--first-parent" is probably the reasonable choice. It matches "stash show", and it's simple and obvious. Do we just want a patch to specify "--first-parent" to stash-log? That would make "-p" just work. The only downside is that there isn't a good way to turn it off. Is it enough to say "if you want to do something clever, use git-log"?

Or do we want to scrap the whole thing and try to update the documentation to make it more clear why "-p" by itself doesn't do anything?

-Peff