Re: [PATCH] Document ls-files -t as obsolete.
- From
Matthieu Moy <matthieu.moy@grenoble-inp.fr>
- Date
- Apr 14, 2010, 14:55 UTC
- Message-ID
- <vpq4oje2idk.fsf@bauges.imag.fr>
- In-Reply-To
- <7vaat6qesd.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes:
Show 20 quoted lines
> Matthieu Moy <Matthieu.Moy@imag.fr> writes: > >> The behavior of "git ls-files -t" is very misleading (see >> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/126516 and >> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/144394/focus=144397 >> for examples of mislead users) and badly documented, hence we point the >> users to superior alternatives. > > I am no entirely happy with this patch. > > If all your scripted Porcelain wants to see is "what are the paths I might > want to run 'git add' on?", you do not want to run diff twice (which is > what "status" does); you would say "ls-files -t -m -o --exclude-standard", > instead. The alternative is not even superiour in this case. > > Having said that, I personally don't think of any other combination of > flags with which "ls-files -t" is useful. > > If there are parts of the documentation that are misleading, perhaps that > is what your patch should be fixing instead, no?
After having tried to understand how "git ls-files -t" was supposed to work ( http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/126516/focus=126520 ), I admit that I have no idea how to document such weird behavior.
If power users want to use "git ls-files -t", let them do (I'm not saying the feature should be removed), but I don't see a point trying to help people to use it.
-- Matthieu Moy http://www-verimag.imag.fr/~moy/