Matthieu Moy <Matthieu.Moy@xxxxxxx> writes:
> Signed-off-by: Matthieu Moy <Matthieu.Moy@xxxxxxx>
> ---
> This patch is new.
>
> Documentation/pretty-formats.txt | 5 ++++-
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/pretty-formats.txt b/Documentation/pretty-formats.txt
> index dcf7429..c434ecc 100644
> --- a/Documentation/pretty-formats.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/pretty-formats.txt
> @@ -79,7 +79,10 @@ stored in the commit object. Notably, the SHA-1s are
> displayed in full, regardless of whether --abbrev or
> --no-abbrev are used, and 'parents' information show the
> true parent commits, without taking grafts or history
> -simplification into account.
> +simplification into account. Note that this format affects the way
> +commits are displayed, but not the way the diff is shown e.g. with
> +`git log --raw`. To get unabbreviated commits in a raw diff format,
> +use `--no-abbrev`.
s/commits in a raw/object names in a raw/?
I wondered what "this format" was, and had to read the patch with
"show -U60" to realize that this is about "--pretty=<format>".
Perhaps the introductory text of the first paratraph in the section
is not clear enough that not just --pretty=raw but --pretty=anything
is about how the commit object is shown and has nothing to do with
how patches are shown, and that is why this new text is necessary?
It somehow looks out of place to have this description only for
'raw'. I think it is OK because it is hard to imagine how other
formats would affect patch output ("git log --pretty=<any>" would
not give any patch, "git log --pretty=<any> -p" would always give
textual patch and not diff-tree raw patch), but it is possible to
confuse between '--pretty=raw' and '--raw'.
Thanks.
--
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