Re: [PATCH] make commit message a little more consistent and conforting
- From
Andreas Ericsson <ae@op5.se>
- Date
- Dec 15, 2006, 15:32 UTC
- Message-ID
- <4582C022.3030706@op5.se>
- In-Reply-To
- <20061215150909.GE17860@spearce.org>
Shawn Pearce wrote:
Show 15 quoted lines
> 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. >
Yes, but it makes sense for merges where you generally pull someone elses work or one of your topic branches because it gives a general feel for the amount of modifications and are a sort of conclusion. Commits are a different thing, because you should know what kind of changes you've just done. If you don't you have other problems. I for one run git diff quite frequently when I'm getting close to a commit to make sure I don't get only the changes I want. I imagine others do too, so getting a diffstat when issuing the actual commit would just be noisy and irritating.
-- Andreas Ericsson andreas.ericsson@op5.se OP5 AB www.op5.se