Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > Pratyush Yadav <me@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > >> I am working on a simple little feature which shows the "amended >> content" when running 'git-commit -v'. Currently, only the changes in >> the _entire_ commit are shown. In a large commit, it is difficult to >> spot a line or two that were amended. So, show just the amended content >> in a different section. > > [jc: even though the diff generation is done before the final commit > is made, let me refer to the commits with refs _after_ the amend is > done]. > > You want to show changes between HEAD@{1}..HEAD (which is what the > "amend" did) in addition to changes between HEAD^..HEAD (which is > what the "amended commit" does) separately. > > The reason why "git commit -v" lets you see the diff since HEAD^ is > to help you write the commit log message. So it is wrong to show > only "what the amend did", as the message you would be writing while > amending is to explain the entire "why the amended commit does what > it does" and by definition the log message for "amend" should not > talk about "why the amend did what it did"---the readers would not > even have access to the older version before the amend. > > It too makes quite a lot of sense to allow readers to see what the > 'amend' did, but that is not something that would help write the log > message. And that is why "git commit -v --amend" does not show it. > It should be inspected even _before_ the user contemplates to run > "git commit --amend" (e.g. "git diff HEAD" before starting to amend). > > So, I am not enthused with this change---it sends a wrong message > (i.e. what the diff in the editor "commit -v" gives the user for). Having said that, I also wonder two things. Assuming that it may be a good idea to show "what the amend does" in addition to "what the amended commit does", 1. would it make sense to show a combined diff to show the differences among the state being recorded in the amended commit as if it were a merge between the state in the original commit and the state in the parent commit? 2. would it make sense to show the differences between HEAD^..HEAD@{1} and between HEAD^..HEAD using the range-diff machinery. I think #1 may turn out to be more useful (I haven't tried it, though) because we already show a moral equivalent elsewhere, namely in "git stash show". Conceptually, it would be similar to showing a stash entry that records the state where some changes have been already added to the index and some other changes are still in the working tree---the base commit of such a stash entry corresponds to the parent commit of the commit being amended, the contents from the index of such a stash entry corresponds to the commit being amended, and the contents from the working tree of such a stash entry corresponds to the final contents you are trying to record as an amended commit.