Re: git-status too verbose?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi,

On Tue, 7 Mar 2006, Karl Hasselström wrote:

> On 2006-03-07 11:05:47 +0530, Joshua N Pritikin wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, Mar 06, 2006 at 04:21:52PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> >
> > >                     HEAD->index     index->files
> > >     ------------------------------------------------
> > >     hello.c         unmodified      modified
> > >     world.c         modified        unmodified
> > >     frotz.c         new             unmodified
> > >         ...
> > >     garbage.c~      ???             n/a
> >
> > For what it's worth, this chart immediately made sense to me and I
> > would prefer it to the current git-status output.
> 
> I agree. This kind of status information makes the whole index concept
> an order of magnitude less confusing. In a way, it lets you learn what
> the index is by example, rather than first having to learn what it is
> in order to be able to grok the status information.

I beg to differ. The index thing is complex enough as it is. You should 
not shy away potentially customers by such output at such often used 
place.

Ciao,
Dscho

[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]