Re: Can we clarify the purpose of `git diff -s`?

From: Sergey Organov <sorganov@gmail.com>
Date: May 12, 2023, 22:47 UTC
Message-ID: <87y1ltgoa0.fsf@osv.gnss.ru>
In-Reply-To: <xmqq8rdtnqij.fsf@gitster.g>

Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes:

Show 11 quoted lines

> Sergey Organov <sorganov@gmail.com> writes:
>
>>> Indeed "--silent" or "--squelch" is one of the things that I plan to
>>> suggest when we were to go with "--no-patch is no longer -s" topic.
>>
>> While we are at this, may I vote against "--squelch", please?
>
> Sure.  I actually do not think either "--silent" or "--squelch" is a
> good name in the context of "git show"; as the output from the
> command consists of the commit log message and the output from the
> diff machinery, and "-s" is about squelching only the latter.

Yep.

>
> I have a name better than these two in mind,

--no-diff?

That said, in the context of git log/show, as opposes to git diff, it all could have been:

  --diff=<list>

where <list> is comma-separated list of options to pass to diff, and then it'd be:

  --diff=off

for the option in question with apparent synonym --no-diff, and less apparent synonym -s.

Hold on! Now it starts to sound familiar... --diff-merges! )))

Thanks, -- Sergey Organov