On Sun, Feb 27 2022, Justin Donnelly via GitGitGadget wrote: > These patches are about the characters and words that can be configured to > display in the PS1 prompt after the branch name. I've been unable to find a > consistent terminology. I refer to them as follows: [short | long] [type] > state indicator where short is for characters (e.g. ?), long is for words > (e.g. |SPARSE), and type is the type of indicator (e.g. sparse or upstream). > I'd be happy to change the commit messages to a different terminology if > that's preferred. > > There are a few inconsistencies with the PS1 prompt upstream state indicator > (GIT_PS1_SHOWUPSTREAM). > > * With GIT_PS1_SHOWUPSTREAM="auto", if there are no other short state > indicators (e.g. + for staged changes, $ for stashed changes, etc.), the > upstream state indicator appears adjacent to the branch name (e.g. > (main=)) instead of being separated by SP or GIT_PS1_STATESEPARATOR (e.g. > (main =)). > * If there are long state indicators (e.g. |SPARSE), a short upstream state > indicator (i.e. GIT_PS1_SHOWUPSTREAM="auto") is to the right of the long > state indicator (e.g. (main +|SPARSE=)) instead of with the other short > state indicators (e.g. (main +=|SPARSE)). > * The long upstream state indicator (e.g. GIT_PS1_SHOWUPSTREAM="verbose") > is separated from other (short or long) state indicators by a hard-coded > SP. Other long state indicators are separated by a hard-coded pipe (|). > > These patches are to make the upstream state indicators more consistent with > other state indicators. > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Changes since v1: > > * Added __git_ps1 examples and before/after tables to commit messages where > applicable. This should make it clearer what the behavior is for other > (not upstream) state indicators, and how the patches make the upstream > state indicator more consistent. > * Removed some extraneous information about long state indicators from > patch 2 commit message. This wasn't really helpful, and was a > distraction. Since this was all in reponse to my review: I've looked this over again and this all LGTM now: Reviewed-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@xxxxxxxxx>
