Re: [PATCH v7 2/4] worktree: improve message when creating a new worktree

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Thomas Gummerer <t.gummerer@xxxxxxxxx> writes:

> Currently 'git worktree add' produces output like the following:
>
>     Preparing ../foo (identifier foo)
>     HEAD is now at 26da330922 <title>
>
> The '../foo' is the path where the worktree is created, which the user
> has just given on the command line.  The identifier is an internal
> implementation detail, which is not particularly relevant for the user
> and indeed isn't mentioned explicitly anywhere in the man page.

OK.  Maybe there once was a place or two that took the identifier as
an input to name a specific worktree to work on (perhaps "prune"?),
but if we no longer do that (which makes sense, as we should be able
to uniquely identify a worktree by the path to it), then it makes
perfect sense to prevent it from appearing in the UI.

> Instead of this message, print a message that gives the user a bit more
> detail of what exactly 'git worktree' is doing.  There are various dwim
> modes which are perform some magic under the hood, which should be

s/are perform/perform/, I think (no need to reroll, only to fix this).

> Additionally currently the "Preparing ..." line is printed to stderr,
> while the "HEAD is now at ..." line is printed to stdout by 'git reset
> --hard', which is used internally by 'git worktree add'.  Fix this
> inconsistency by printing the "Preparing ..." message to stdout as
> well.  As "Preparing ..." is not an error, stdout also seems like the
> more appropriate output stream.

I think it is a bug for reset to give this kind of informational
message to the standard output stream.  A rule of thumb I use is "is
this something that a user who wants quiet operation would wish to
squelch with --quiet option?" and if the answer is yes, it should go
to the standard error output, so info and progress should go to the
standard output in general.

But I am OK to unify to the standard output with this patch.  We may
want to come back and correct _both_ this new message and what reset
says, but that is outside the scope of this topic.

Thanks.



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]

  Powered by Linux