Re: Improving git branch

> I don't fully understand - if I did that, then what difference would
> an average user actually see?
> 
> On 17 December 2014 at 11:28, Michael J Gruber <git@drmicha.warpmail.net> wrote:
>> John Tapsell schrieb am 17.12.2014 um 12:10:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>>   I'm interested in putting in some time and effort into improving the
>>> output of "git branch".
>>>
>>>   What I'm thinking is an output like this:
>>>
>>> $ git branch
>>>
>>> 2014-12-17 * (detached from origin/master)     deaba04 Do stuff
>>> 2014-12-15   john.ta/add_timing_info                6edbcfa  Add timing stuff
>>> 2014-12-14   master                                          8537316
>>> [origin/master: ahead 1, behind 16] Some stuff
>>> 2014-12-12   john.ta/new_reduce_memory       99d84db Reintroduce: memory stuff
>>> 2014-12-05   john.ta/bugfixes                            e15c95e Add stuff
>>> 2014-12-03   john.ta/container                           e9fd4e5 This
>>> branch is a test bed for containers
>>>
>>>
>>> (These columns are supposed to be all aligned nicely..)
>>>
>>> So, features:
>>>
>>> 1. Show the date of the last commit
>>> 2. Sort by date.  Most recently used branches at the top
>>> 3. Show the branch name, including your current "branch", with a * to
>>> indicate that it's checked out.
>>> 4. Show the sha
>>> 5. Show the branch DESCRIPTION - and if that's not available, show the
>>> short-line of the most recent commit.
>>>
>>> There is also a small amount of color here that I can't paste here, to
>>> follow the coloring in the current git branch.
>>>
>>> Before I start making patches etc, what do people think?  Would I have
>>> a chance of getting this in?  Should I change some aspects etc?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> John Tapsell
>>>
>>
>> I support the general goal, we have quite some way to go there.
>>
>> As to the method: "git branch" in list mode, "git tag" in list mode and
>> "git for-each-ref" all do similar things and are in turn not dissimilar
>> from "git log --no-walk" with appropriate formatting and rev options.
>>
>> Rather than extending "git branch" any further[*], I suggest a bolder
>> strategy:
>>
>> - unify/merge for-each-ref and pretty formats (and code) as far as possible
>> - leverage that for the list modes of branch and tag
>>
>> That would allow everyone to get their favourite listing, just like for
>> logs. Otherwise it would be very difficult to agree on *the* proper
>> format for an extended branch or tag list.
>>
>> Michael
>>
>>
>> [*] I know I'm a sinner, too.