Re: [PATCH v2] git-prompt: show presence of unresolved conflicts at command prompt
- From
Justin Donnelly <justinrdonnelly@gmail.com>
- Date
- Aug 16, 2022, 03:36 UTC
- Message-ID
- <CAGTqyRyBAR1SCpKwU2mTTKz0-nOPgJ1Es6aGVBgJqrnZ9Z_P1w@mail.gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <r980s5q6-7714-8r0q-4sp1-3qs1458r17qs@tzk.qr>
On Mon, Aug 15, 2022 at 8:50 AM Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> wrote:
Show 24 quoted lines
> > Hi, > > On Sun, 14 Aug 2022, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > > Justin Donnelly <justinrdonnelly@gmail.com> writes: > > > > > I hope this is against protocol/etiquette, but after some initial > > > feedback from Junio, I haven't gotten any more. I wasn't sure if > > > nobody had seen the patch, or if there just wasn't any interest. > > > > It probably is a bit of both. I personally did not see much point > > in adding the long "conflicts" marker to the shell prompt (I did > > worry about possible complaints by end users triggered by seeing > > them suddenly without asking, which was why I commented on the > > patch) and I was waiting for interested folks to speak out. > > Speaking for myself, I was too busy elsewhere. But now that I looked over > the patch, I think it is fine. My only feedback is that it would be wise > to only add a single test case because that is plenty enough (after all, > it validates the `ls-files --unmerged` call and not the `cherry-pick` > code) and it is unnecessary to waste the electricity on additional tests > cases (even if somebody else foots the bill, it would do well for all of > us to start being more mindful about energy consumption).
That makes sense. I'll get started on a re-roll to just have a single test that focuses specifically on the conflict indicator.
> > Ciao, > Dscho
Thanks, Justin