Dear diary, on Tue, Apr 11, 2006 at 02:06:07AM CEST, I got a letter where Junio C Hamano <junkio@xxxxxxx> said that... > Junio C Hamano <junkio@xxxxxxx> writes: > > > Pasky wanted to have an option to get both diff-raw output and > > diff-patch output. This implements "git-diff-* --with-raw" > > (which obviously implies -p as well) to do so. > > > > Because all the necessary information is already on extended > > header lines such as "index xxxxxx..yyyyyy" and "rename from" > > lines, this is not strictly necessary, but if it helps > > Porcelains... > > And this alternative gives raw upfront followed by patch. It > was unclear which one Pasky wanted, so... Technically, I don't really care, I can parse both. :-) But I prefer this format since then people can use it even when visually inspecting the diff output, as a kind of quick patch summary followed with the patch itself. It might be nice to separate the patch by another newline, like my patch does (but again, I can parse both). Your patch is nicer, but the --with-raw option name is strange - git-diff-* output is by default the raw format, and with the --with-raw option you tell it to furthermore include the raw format... sounds wrong, doesn't it? ;-) I'd call it --patch-with-raw or -P. Also, it would be nice to handle the -c case as well. Not strictly necessary for cg-log right now, but other cg-Xfollowrenames users might want to have that for merges... (Potentially, this might break renames detection but the case is really obscure.) -- Petr "Pasky" Baudis Stuff: http://pasky.or.cz/ Right now I am having amnesia and deja-vu at the same time. I think I have forgotten this before. - : send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html