From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2011 04:18:19 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH] document 'T' status from git-status
Message-ID: <7vpqhdrdys.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
In-Reply-To: <4EADB4DB.5020004@icgroup.com>

Mark Dominus <mjd@icgroup.com> writes:

>> The current organization of this table may need to be rethought, but if we
>> were to keep it, then this change is far from sufficient. For example, you
>> do not explain what XY = TT means.
> Thanks for your response.
>
> I did not try to document that because in my experimenting I was not
> able to produce that situation.

It is trivial if you realize that X is the change between the HEAD and the
index, and Y is the change between the index and the working tree. Most
importantly, no direct comparison between the HEAD and the working tree
gets in the picture.

    $ mv COPYING RENAMING
    $ ln -s RENAMING COPYING
    $ git add COPYING
    $ mv RENAMING COPYING
    $ git status -suno
    TT COPYING

> Will you be applying the alternative patch you suggested, or would you
> prefer that I try to produce one along those lines?

I dunno.

An obvious alternative is to add T next to all occurrences of M in the
table where we say "M is possible", but unless it is accompanied by an
explanation "T is just a special case of M", I suspect the resulting
description would be harder to understand than currently is, and as long
as the reader understands "T is just a special case of M", then there
isn't much point adding T everywhere M appears in the table anyway, so...