From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Mon, 07 May 2012 18:03:29 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH] correct git-status Porcelain Format documentation
Message-ID: <7vsjfb6f7y.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
In-Reply-To: <20120506132959.GA28214@sigill.intra.peff.net>

Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:

> 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.