Re: [PATCH] correct git-status Porcelain Format documentation
- From
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
- Date
- May 7, 2012, 18:03 UTC
- Message-ID
- <7vsjfb6f7y.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
- In-Reply-To
- <20120506132959.GA28214@sigill.intra.peff.net>
Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:
Show 8 quoted lines
> The patch itself looks obviously correct and describes the current > behavior. But I have to wonder: the --short format will also not produce > the branch line unless you provide "-b". So why is it that the porcelain > format does not respect "-b", since anybody who asked for it would > obviously be expecting to find and parse it? > > Should this bit of documentation be dropped in favor of just making "-b" > work properly?
I would say so. Also "branch line" was an undefined term and I had to read the whole thing to find out what the updated documentation was talking about; we may want to consistently say "branch and tracking info" as the earlier part of the document says.