Re: svn versus git

From: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Date: Dec 15, 2006, 21:55 UTC
Message-ID: <7v64ccomdc.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.63.0612152117390.3635@wbgn013.biozentrum.uni-wuerzburg.de>

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

Show 14 quoted lines

> Hi,
>
> On Fri, 15 Dec 2006, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 15 Dec 2006, Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy wrote:
>> 
>> > About adding index support to git-show, yes it's really messy. index
>> > doesn't have tree objects.
>> 
>> Insofar, it is not messy: git-show only shows _objects_. For example, "git 
>> show :README" works as expected if you have a file called "README" in the 
>> index...
>
> Note: this is not completely true. The index contains cache_trees...

Let's not go there.

I was reviewing the list of plumbing in Documentation/git.txt last night, and I think ls-files is the only command that user may still want to use from the command line every day.

I originally thought that it would only be after a conflicted merge, always with -u option, but some people seem to find that "ls-files --others" and friends are useful (I never use that myself) and if so what it does really in the realm of Porcelain.

I haven't formed a firm opinion on this yet, but possibilities are:

 * we reclassify ls-files as a Porcelain-ish (but do not change
   its UI nor defaults at all); we might want to give a shorter
   alias to the command, though, if we go this route.

 * we give '--list' option to 'git show' and in such a case,
   lack of objects does not default to HEAD -- when no object is
   given it internally diverts to cmd_ls_files() instead;

 * we add 'git ls' command to give Porcelain-ish access to
   ls-tree and ls-files.