Marc Branchaud <marcnarc@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes: >>> * [new branch] 2nd-index -> pclouds/2nd-index >>> * [new branch] some-kind-of-long-ref-name >>> -> pclouds/some-kind-of-long-ref-name >>> * [new branch] 3nd-index -> pclouds/3nd-index > ... > I think aligning it with the -> on the other lines makes the most > aesthetic sense. > > Are you worried that the right-hand-side ref might still wrap? Not really. Given that we reserve some fixed screen real estate on the left hand side for the sign and explanation (like [new branch]) and 4 columns in the middle for " -> ", we have around 80-25=55 columns to work with to fit "2nd-index" and such twice plus "pclouds/" once. Assuming that remote names are not overly long (say, around 10 columns), that leaves about 20-25 columns for the branch name proper. By punting on the effort to find a readable format that does not repeat the same info twice, we are sending a signal to the users that they cannot use a meaningful sentence as the name of a branch name; they need to stay within a relatively short (i.e. 1/4 of a line width) branch name, to avoid triggering this multi-line behaviour. The same 55 columns minus remote name, e.g. around 40 columns, could have been used to express the branch name once, if we managed to find a non-redundant format. That is what bothers me somewhat. -- 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