Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > Sergey Organov <sorganov@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > >> Ah, now I see, but it's exactly lack of documentation (and tests) that I >> was referring to as the "problem of the historical status quo" on the >> Git side, so I was somewhat confused by your original response. > > Well, you said the fixup "restores" the status quo, but in fact, > with or without the fixup, before or after it, the lack of > documentation was there. No, what problematic patch did, it changed behavior of diff-index exactly in accordance with its *current* documentation that doesn't mention --cc as accepted command-line option for diff-index. So, with that patch applied, there were no this problem with documentation anymore. Implementation now actually matched the docs. Unfortunately, that brought worse problem: it unexpectedly broke gitk, that, as it appeared, depends on undocumented diff-index behavior. So, I re-enabled --cc in diff-index, lesser of two evils, that brought back the problem of lack of documentation and test cases for "diff-index --cc". This way, the status quo has been restored indeed. > So I thought you were talking about something else. > >>> I wanted to give you some credit for having worked on "--diff-merges", >>> an effort to generalize things in a related area. >> >> Thanks for that! More to follow ) > > I somehow expect there was need for no further work in this area, > but there are also many other areas in Git where your talent is > applicable and appreciated, I am sure ;-) I'm afraid we still didn't reach one of the ultimate goals of all this: letting -m be useful again, specifically, as suitable *user* option. Also, current --diff-merges options are incapable of providing current -m behavior, as has been noticed by Jonathan Nieder in another thread on reverting "-m implies -p" commit: "When I try it locally, -m shows no diff by default, whereas --diff-merges=separate shows a diff for merges." and I'm going to fix this by adding yet another feature for --diff-merges. This is to be pure addition, thus causing no backward compatibility problems. Thanks, -- Sergey Organov
