Re: [PATCH] git-explain

From: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Date: Dec 5, 2006, 23:37 UTC
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.63.0612060033540.28348@wbgn013.biozentrum.uni-wuerzburg.de>
In-Reply-To: <7vslfudjsa.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>

Hi,

On Tue, 5 Dec 2006, Junio C Hamano wrote:

Show 7 quoted lines

> "Martin Langhoff" <martin.langhoff@gmail.com> writes:
> 
> > I like what it does too... but why not as part of git-status?
> 
> The biggest reason was that it is a demonstration of concepts,
> not replacement of anything.  Maybe "git status" can be replaced
> with something like that if people worked on it enough.

Okay, so what do people need? This is evidently a question for people who are not intimately familiar with the core of Git. So, where are you newbies when we need you? Speak up!

Surely, you hit a wall on the road, where you really wanted to ask "git wtf"?

Show 6 quoted lines

> The current use of "git status" inside "git commit" needs to be revamped 
> if we pursue this further, though.  Because one of the points the "what 
> state is this repository in" check "explain" does is to define what 
> operations are sensible in each state, and most likely in many state it 
> would not make _any_ sense to run "git commit" (say, in the middle of 
> "bisect").

That is right, but it is only a matter of having a command line switch to suppress what you do not need for the commit message. After all, "status" really should tell you about the status of the working directory. The fact that we have the _same_ script for "commit" and "status" is no excuse!

Ciao, Dscho