Re: [PATCH/RFC] git log --oneline alternative with dates, times and initials

From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Date: Sep 29, 2016, 18:30 UTC
Message-ID: <20160929183006.exyaikr4ijiq5tp3@sigill.intra.peff.net>
In-Reply-To: <xmqqy42afvy1.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>

On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 10:38:14AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:

Show 9 quoted lines

> > I have no problem taking this in contrib or whatever, until a point when
> > Git is capable of doing the same thing itself. I just hoped to trick you
> > into working on Git. :)
> 
> I thought we stopped adding random things to contrib/, though.
> 
> Unlike the earlier days of Git, if a custom command that uses Git is
> very userful, it can live its own life and flourish within the much
> larger Git userbase we have these days.

I dunno. I said "contrib or whatever" to duck that question. :)

I do not have a strong opinion either way. In some ways this script is similar to diff-highlight, which is in contrib. Perhaps that is only because diff-highlight is grandfathered. But I also think it somewhat makes sense, because in an ideal world diff-highlight gets thrown away in favor of git's internal diff routines learning to do the same thing. And in theory this script is in the same position.

But I also buy the argument that contrib/ is simply a hassle. This script can live in its own repository somewhere, and handle announcements and patches on the list. For that matter, so could diff-highlight, and I don't mind ripping it out of contrib if that's the consensus. My only real objection is that doing so is more work than leaving it as-is, and I'm lazy.

-Peff