Re: [PATCH] Builtin-commit: show on which branch a commit was added
- From
Andreas Ericsson <ae@op5.se>
- Date
- Oct 1, 2008, 15:22 UTC
- Message-ID
- <48E395BF.5080005@op5.se>
- In-Reply-To
- <20081001151011.GA21310@spearce.org>
Shawn O. Pearce wrote:
Show 53 quoted lines
> Andreas Ericsson <ae@op5.se> wrote: >> Jeff King wrote: >>> On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 11:59:25AM +0200, Andreas Ericsson wrote: >>>> Another way would be to write >>>> <branch>: Created <hash>: "subject line..." >>> I think I like this even better. >> Me too, but I thought it up after I sent out the first patch. The nicest >> part is that the info that's always present will always end up in the >> same place, while my patch moves the branch-name around depending on >> the length of the subject line. >> >> Let's agree here and now that the subject should be last and that "commit " >> should be dropped, at least for the normal cases. > > Actually I rather like the patch you submitted yesterday: > > normal case > Created abc9056 (i386: Snib the sprock) on i386 > > detached head > Created DETACHED commit abc9056 (i386: Snib the sprock) > > initial commit > Created root-commit abc9056 (i386: Snib the sprock) on i386 > > The detached HEAD and root-commit cases are clearly denoted at the > very start of the line, where your eyes are likely to start scanning > from first before you say "Doh, its just line noise because Git wants > a pat on the back for doing what I asked". Thus you are likely > to notice something out of the ordinary (commit on detached HEAD) > pretty quick. > > The "<branch>: Created <hash>: subject" format described above > has the problem that a lot of errors look like "error: foo: bar" > and the human eye is probably trained to glance over it. IMHO its > formatted too much like an error message line. > >>> My only concern is that many programs >>> say "program: some error", so you could potentially have a confusing >>> branch name. But I personally have never used a branch name that would >>> cause such confusion. >> A valid concern, certainly. We needn't use colons for the branch-name >> though, but could instead use some other delimiter, like this: >> [<branch>] Created <hash>: "subject line..." >> although I do believe we're close to nitpicking this issue to death >> now. It's not *that* important after all. > > Yup, its a bikeshed. > > Right now I'm happy with your patch in next. I don't like taking > the paint brush away from folks, but I also don't want to be applying > a ton of commit message reformatting patches over the next week. ;-) >
Thanks for putting your foot down. Having thought more about it, I was quite disgusted to realize I spent brain-time on something so unimportant.
-- Andreas Ericsson andreas.ericsson@op5.se OP5 AB www.op5.se Tel: +46 8-230225 Fax: +46 8-230231