Re: wishlist: git info

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Nov 13, 2007, 19:08 UTC
Message-ID: <7v3avat147.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0711131111220.4362@racer.site>

Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> writes:

Show 10 quoted lines

> On Tue, 13 Nov 2007, Thomas Neumann wrote:
>
>> Perhaps also project description (if it exists?) one can specify a 
>> project description? I did not even know this. But yes, this would be 
>> useful, too. In general I think git info should show everything to 
>> quickly understand what is currently checked out.
>
> Is slightly troubles me that you put so much emphasis on what I would call 
> "remote information".  I understand that in svn, your working directory 
> without the server is not very useful.  But we do not have that problem.

I mildly disagree.

Exactly because you can do so much more in isolation than with other systems like SVN, I tend to think that you would want to know what "git remote show" gives you, and a lot more (e.g. what "git shortlog origin@{1}..origin" would give you if you were to fetch now). You can deviate from the others quite a lot without synchronizing, because git allows you to do so very easily, and I can understand that some people will find it scary when it comes to the point to synchronize with the others.

A stronger support to learn "what happened there while I was looking the other way" would be a definite plus.

But "project description"? Give me a break. If you have cloned the repository (or learned the existence of repository), you already learned from elsewhere what the project is about.

I haven't spoken in this thread because honestly I found most of the things mentioned here were totally uninteresting.