Hi Junio,
On Thu, 23 Aug 2018, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@xxxxxx> writes:
>
> > On Wed, 22 Aug 2018, Kyle Meyer wrote:
> >
> >> 275267937b (range-diff: make dual-color the default mode, 2018-08-13)
> >> replaced --dual-color with --no-dual-color but left the option's
> >> summary untouched. Rewrite the summary to describe --no-dual-color
> >> rather than dual-color.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Kyle Meyer <kyle@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >> ---
> >> builtin/range-diff.c | 2 +-
> >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/builtin/range-diff.c b/builtin/range-diff.c
> >> index f52d45d9d6..7dc90a5ec3 100644
> >> --- a/builtin/range-diff.c
> >> +++ b/builtin/range-diff.c
> >> @@ -25,7 +25,7 @@ int cmd_range_diff(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix)
> >> OPT_INTEGER(0, "creation-factor", &creation_factor,
> >> N_("Percentage by which creation is weighted")),
> >> OPT_BOOL(0, "no-dual-color", &simple_color,
> >> - N_("color both diff and diff-between-diffs")),
> >> + N_("restrict coloring to outer diff markers")),
> >
> > How about "use simple diff colors" instead?
>
> I am wondering if it makes sense to remove the option altogether.
> I've been trying to view the comparison of the same ranges in both
> styles for the past few days, and I never found a reason to choose
> "no dual color" option myself.
We do have a track record of making decisions based on our little bubble,
don't we.
On IRC, there is at least on publicly viewable comment by a user who
preferred the simple color diff, at least in one use case:
http://colabti.org/irclogger/irclogger_log/git-devel?date=2018-07-13#l97
And I am living in my own bubble, too. I think I heard feedback regarding
range-diff from some dozen people. Multiplying 6% by the download numbers
of Git for Windows alone... that's a lot of people who can put
--no-dual-color to good use at least in *some* situations.
In short: I am hesitant to remove a feature that would help some users.
Ciao,
Dscho
