Re: [PATCH] Add contrib/stg-gitk: helper script to run gitk

From: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@gmail.com>
Date: Jan 10, 2007, 23:47 UTC
Message-ID: <b0943d9e0701101547v5e18bdf8xcc34cf78ea5f1f9f@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20070109220332.GD17093@nan92-1-81-57-214-146.fbx.proxad.net>

On 09/01/07, Yann Dirson <ydirson@altern.org> wrote:

Show 8 quoted lines

> On Tue, Jan 09, 2007 at 10:02:06AM +0000, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > There is 'stg series --graphical' that invokes gitk.
>
> For some reason I did not look for this functionality in that place :)
>
> But it is a bit different, in that unapplied patches appear detached
> from the whole history.  Possibly out of personal taste, I do not find
> this very useful, and prefer to see them as "gitk --all" shows them.

I've never tried 'gitk --all' but I'm OK with changing the way --graphical option displays the patches.

> > Maybe the 'show' command could have a similar option.
>
> Hm, not sure.  "show" is about a patch, not a stack.

'show' can also display a range of patches.

> That makes me think that such command names like "show" are a bit too
> general: stgit uses "show" for patches, but nothing says it is for a
> patch and not a series.

This was initially a re-implementation of 'git show' that was able to understand patch names (you can also give any commit id as argument). I later extended it to accept patch ranges.

> Also, when presenting GIT/StGIT to co-workers, I found them to be
> confused by eg. "stg push" and "stg commit" having different semantics
> than "git push" and "git commit".

As I said in a different e-mail, push/pop were the command names used by quilt. I agree that they are confusing. Maybe we could change commit/uncommit to store/unstore or something else (but I would like to keep push/pop).

I don't like the idea of command aliases that much, it looks like unneeded complexity. You can use the bash aliases if you want (i.e. 'alias stg-ppush="stg push"').

-- 
Catalin