On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 11:00:21AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Michael J Gruber <git@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
> > status, status -s and the like are in an ordinary user's tool box.
> > ls-files isn't, at least not with "-t", which we even mark as deprecated.
> >
> > That makes me wonder, though, how difficult it would be to
> > wt_status_collect_unchanged() and to leverage the status machinery
> > rather than ls-files.
>
> Good point. wt-status feels like a much better infrastructure to
> build on than "ls-files -t", which should die ;-). Especially if
> the command is interested in showing the state of the working tree
> files relative to the tree of HEAD, as "ls-files" is purely between
> the index and the working tree.
I had to look up "-t", having never used it myself. ;)
What I noticed in the manpage was rather gross:
-t
This feature is semi-deprecated. For scripting purpose, git-status(1)--porcelain
and git-diff-files(1)--name-status are almost always superior alternatives, and
users should look at git-status(1)--short or git-diff(1)--name-status for more
user-friendly alternatives.
It looks like asciidoc sucks up the space between a linkgit macro and
the next word. I can fix it with "{nbsp}", but I'm not sure if there's a
better way.
It's also rather hard to read the commands as intended with the "(1)"
stuck there. I'm tempted to just make this `git status --porcelain` and
drop the link entirely, but I guess it is helping people who read the
HTML version.
-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