Hi Ævar, On Tue, 6 Nov 2018, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: > On Tue, Nov 06 2018, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > > > On Mon, 5 Nov 2018, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: > > > >> On Mon, Nov 05 2018, Eric Sunshine wrote: > >> > >> > On Mon, Nov 5, 2018 at 3:07 PM Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> >> Add a --no-patch option which shows which changes got removed, added > >> >> or moved etc., without showing the diff associated with them. > >> > > >> > This option existed in the very first version[1] of range-diff (then > >> > called branch-diff) implemented by Dscho, although it was called > >> > --no-patches (with an "es"), which it inherited from tbdiff. I think > >> > someone (possibly me) pointed out that --no-patch (sans "es") would be > >> > more consistent with existing Git options. I don't recall why Dscho > >> > removed the option during the re-rolls, but the explanation may be in > >> > that thread. > >> > >> Thanks for digging. Big thread, not going to re-read it now. I'd just > >> like to have this. > > > > In my hands, the well-documented `-s` option works (see e.g. > > https://git-scm.com/docs/git-diff#git-diff--s), although I have to admit > > that the `git-range-diff` manual does not talk about the diff-options. > > > > And for the record, for me, `git range-diff A...B --no-patch` *already* > > works. > > Neither of those works for me without my patch. E.g. > > ./git-range-diff -s 711aaa392f...a5ba8f2101 > ./git-range-diff --no-patch 711aaa392f...a5ba8f2101 > > This is on current next, 2.19.1.1182.g4ecb1133ce. What version are you > on? I tried it with git version 2.19.0.windows.1. To verify, I repeated this with `next` (git version 2.19.1.1215.g8438c0b2453a): ./git range-diff -s 711aaa392f...a5ba8f2101 fatal: unrecognized argument: --output-indicator-new=> error: could not parse log for 'a5ba8f2101..711aaa392f' Which means that something broke rather dramatically between v2.19.0.windows.1 and 8438c0b2453a. Ciao, Dscho > > >> > >> > I was also wondering if --summarize or --summary-only might be a > >> > better name, describing the behavior at a higher level, but since > >> > there is precedent for --no-patch (or --no-patches in tbdiff), perhaps > >> > the name is fine as is. > >> > >> I think we should aim to keep a 1=1 mapping between range-diff and > >> log/show options when possible, even though the output might have a > >> slightly different flavor as my 4th paragraph discussing a potential > >> --stat talks about. > >> > >> E.g. I can imagine that range-diff --no-patch --stat --summary would not > >> show the patch, but a stat as described there, plus e.g. a "create > >> mode..." if applicable. > >> > >> This change implements only a tiny fraction of that, but it would be > >> very neat if we supported more stuff, and showed it in range-diff-y way, > >> e.g. some compact format showing: > >> > >> 1 file changed, 3->2 insertions(+), 10->9 deletions(-) > >> create mode 100(6 -> 7)44 new-executable > >> > >> > The patch itself looks okay. > >> > > >> > [1]: https://public-inbox.org/git/8bc517e35d4842f8d9d98f3b99adb9475d6db2d2.1525361419.git.johannes.schindelin@xxxxxx/ > >> >
