On Sat, Dec 04, 2010 at 10:30:21PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > * aa/status-hilite-branch (2010-11-18) 1 commit > - status: show branchname with a configurable color > > I am indifferent/uninterested; I don't see anything wrong with it, but I > do not find coloring the field particularly useful myself. I am not particularly interested, either, but FWIW, the gitcommit syntax highlighting that ships with vim does highlight this, so there are at least other people who think this is a good idea. However, I'm not sure about the default. The original patch defaulted to magenta. Your fixup defaults to "plain", but that is a regression (albeit a minor one) for people who have status.header set. I think the correct default is "the same as status.header", but that is sadly not trivial to implement because of the way we parse and store colors. I don't know if it is worth holding up the patch. It is only a regression to the user's eyes, and it is reasonably easy for them to tweak their config. -Peff -- To unsubscribe from this list: 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