On Thu, 14 Dec 2006, Shawn Pearce wrote: > Nicolas Pitre <nico@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, 14 Dec 2006, Shawn O. Pearce wrote: > > > It also breaks from our normal behavior of not printing > > > anything if the command was successful. > > > I really don't think this is a good rule. > > > > NOte that I'm not against commands that are silent by default. I really > > think that git-add should remain silent on success by default when > > successful. > > > > But the rule of thumb should be about the importance of the action > > performed by the command. > > But git-init-db is really important. > > A very reasonable argument, butchered for my evil quoting needs. :-) > > If we want to keep letting git-init-db output something, then > the output should be a lot more meaningful to the average English > speaking new Git user than "defaulting to local storage area". Absolutely! > BTW, I almost also submitted a patch to remove the "Committing > initial tree ..." message in git-commit-tree, but thought twice about > it as committing an initial tree is sort of an important difference > from normal activity that we should highlight it somehow... Please ignore that one. I'm working on a patch to handle the commit case (need to update the tutorial accordingly). Nicolas - 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