From: Patrick Doyle <wpdster@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 16:30:12 GMT
Subject: Re: workflow question
Message-ID: <e2a1d0aa0707240930gb99cb0csd1ce9946d33982d@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <81b0412b0707240837l16844dbct52ffa426d8b8547b@mail.gmail.com>

On 7/24/07, Alex Riesen <raa.lkml@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 7/24/07, Patrick Doyle <wpdster@gmail.com> wrote:
> > 2) When I don't fork a branch,
>
> this is a confusing sentence: "fork" does not happen as
> an explicit operation (if at all). You just commit somewhere
> and depending on how you look at the history you either
> see or not see a "fork".
ok, I probably should have said, "When I don't create a branch, and
when I have not yet committed any changes for the particular
feature..."

>
> > ... and I don't commit until I've completed
> > the particular feature I'm working on, I can get a fairly good idea of
> > where I am and what I was doing last (which might be 5-7 days ago,
> > given high priority interrupts on other projects, summer vacations,
> > etc...) just by running a "git status".  I see that there are 7 new
> > files, and 2 modified files.  I know that, when I fork my branch, I
> > can use "git diff master" to see what's different between my branch
> > and the master, but then I get the diff of all of the changes as well,
> > which is too much information.  "git diff --name-only" and "git diff
> > --summary" are closer, but I can't tell what's been added vs. what's
> > been changed.  Any suggestions?
>
> "git log -p ..master", or even simpler "gitk ..master"
I was hoping for something less verbose than a diff or a patch file --
something that just listed what has changed -- I'll have to
investigate whether your "my_status()" macro provides the information
for which I was looking -- thanks for the pointer.

And, as for gitk, there is something about the combination of the
screen on my laptop, my Linux installation (FC6), my X server
configuration, and/or me that makes the fonts totally unreadable.  I
keep meaning to follow up on that, but I'm stuck in a
chicken-and-the-egg situation.  I don't see the utility of gitk
because I can't read the display that it produces.  I don't look for
the time to fix the display that it produces because, thus far, I
don't see the utility of gitk.  Sigh...


> my_status() {
>   git diff --cached --name-status -r -M -C HEAD -- "$@" && \
>   git diff --name-status -r -M -C -- "$@"
> }
>
> Use as: my_status [pathname-limiter].
> Does not show untracked files, though.
>
Ahhh... I was looking around git-status instead of git-diff.  That
makes sense now that you mention it.  Someday I may have the intuitive
understanding of git that would point me in that direction myself, but
I ain't there yet :-)

Thanks.

--wpd