Hi, Jeff King wrote: > On Thu, May 20, 2021 at 03:36:59PM +0900, Junio C Hamano wrote: >> The original commit and its log message we ended up with did not >> explain the motivation behind well enough. >> >> The motivation from the original thread: >> >> When I use a pager that escapes the escape character or highlights the >> content itself the output of git diff without the pager should have >> colors but not with the pager. For example using git diff with a >> pathspec is quite short most of the time. For git diff I have to >> enable paging manually and run git diff | $PAGER usually but git log >> uses the pager automatically and should not use colors with it. >> >> can be quoted as a whole, but "the point is to deal with ..." is a >> succinct summary that is good enough for the purpose of this commit, >> I would think. > > Thanks, I was just preparing a near-identical response. > > I do think it's an important principle in general to summarize the > content of things we link to. It's just that the summary in this case > was so short that it was easy to look past. :) I was making a different point: that the summary is so good that the link is not even needed (or that if you are just trying to cite your sources, it should be a footnote). The current proposed commit message makes the link prominent, which tells the reader that reading the thread is a good use of their time, when in this example it isn't. [...] > When color mode options (e.g., `color.ui`) are set to `auto`, Git by > default will enable color when the output is going to a terminal or to > a pager (since the pager itself is outputting to a terminal). This is > a problem if your pager doesn't faithfully relay the color codes to > the terminal. You can set this boolean to `false` to disable color > when output is going to a terminal. Oh! FWIW, I like that and don't think it's overkill. > On Thu, May 20, 2021 at 03:36:59PM +0900, Junio C Hamano wrote: >> So, in short, I think it would be sufficient to amend the proposed >> log message with s/deal with/to deal with/ and nothing else. > > I'm happy with that. Yes, the proposed patch is an improvement on the status quo, so I'd rather that it land as-is than not land at all. That said, the resulting text is still confusing. It can be easy to forget how much context we're assuming when we read it ourselves; the proposed text still makes an uninitiated reader go "huh?" in a way that the "When color mode options" example above does not. Thanks, Jonathan
