On 06.09.20 23:59, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Denton Liu <liu.denton@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > >> Hmm, I'm not sure how I feel about being able to override formats other >> than "reference". > > Is the idea to introduce a parallel namespace to pretty.<name>? I > am not sure why that is a good idea than, say a single variable that > says "to me, pretty.<name> would override even the built-in names". > > I am not sure how I feel about being able to override built-in > formats in the first place, though. > > After all, pretty.<name> were introduced so that user-defined ones > can be invoked with an equal ease as the built-in ones, but > overriding common understanding among the users of the tool is a > different story. I gave a reason for the reference format, at least. Would you be fine with a patch that just allows to override the reference format (for the stated reasons)?
