From: Catalin Marinas Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2007 23:47:33 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add contrib/stg-gitk: helper script to run gitk Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <20070109220332.GD17093@nan92-1-81-57-214-146.fbx.proxad.net> On 09/01/07, Yann Dirson wrote: > 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