On 10/15/2012 11:13 AM, Michael J Gruber wrote:
It really doesn't matter much what works for you, and it doesn't matter
what works for me either. The point is: What works for most users?
Obviously, that was my point as well ;-)
I'm quite unfamiliar with the color coding of git (I hadn't enabled that
option), I suppose consistency would be better, but then you'd have to
add some code to figure out which color is used for what in git's output
and convert that to the code setting the colors here.
As a starter, you could use the default colors which git uses. Querying
git for the colors could be the next, optional step.
I suppose it would be a start.
so how should it be?
all committed: green branch, no characters
only staged changes: green branch, colored characters (yellow/red?)
only unstaged changes: red/yellow branch, colored characters (red)
staged and unstaged changes: red/yellow branch, multiple characters in
red/yellow?)
detached head: red commit-sha1 (abbrev.), characters as above?
What is the most useful thing to show in case of a detached head?
-the commit hash of current head?
-"detached head"
As for the characters used, I think there's a good reason not to use the
ones git uses in the prompt. The characters in git status output are put
in front of the files they apply to, in the prompt you only get a
summarized output. And perhaps that argument could be extended to the
use of the colors as well, I prefer to know whether I have uncommitted
changes and in that category I want to know whether I already staged
them or not.
Well, sure. The prompt could show any of AMCRD if you have any of those
changes. * + are shortcuts saying you have any of those.
How do you suppose that should work?
Add another configuration parameter like GIT_PS1_SHOWSTATUSSBCHARS
(please give a better suggestion ;-) or the other way around
GIT_PS1_SHOWSTARPLUS (either of which could be the default)
I think it's very confusing to have completely different schemes (not
just themes) for two versions of the same information: concise status
information.
So, please try and follow "git status -sb".
I think there are different levels of conciseness. And I see "git status
-sb" uses green for staged modified files, which would be confusing to me.
...only because you don't know the color coding scheme. It's green
because those changes are saved somewhere (in the index) and would even
survice a branch switch.
I suppose you could see that as green (I usually view a yellow traffic
light as green as well ;-)
Isn't it best practice to commit the staged changes ASAP? (But let's not
diverge in this thread to discuss best-practices, so consider that a
rhetorical question for now ;-)
No, I said red for unstaged, green for staged for the characters, i.e. a
* would always be red if present, a + always green if present.
For the "branch name", it would be red for detached head and green for
checked out branch.
using green for staged changes could be acceptable for me, but I'm
slightly worried that a colored character would be too slight a hint.
OTOH, a detached head would show up with or without color...
Perhaps, but that would be confusing to me ;-)
If that is case, you can try and propose changing that scheme...
But there's really a good reason for it. Cached (staged) changes are
"safe" because they are saved in the index, and also they are "good to
go into the next commit", i.e. the commit traffic lights are green!
I suppose I knew that in the back of my mind, but not as clearly as you
spell it out here... Tnx!
/Simon
--
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