On Fri, Oct 19, 2007 at 04:39:56PM +1000, David Symonds wrote: > What about making it even more terse so it's even easier to visually > scan: (mainly thinking that fast-forwarding is so common it could be > considered the "default") Reasonable. I think it would be easier to scan if the fields were column-aligned, but that requires making a few passes, which would change the current code quite a bit. Or we could just fake it and give it 20 characters for a branch name, padded with spaces. > > ==> git://repo.or.cz/git/spearce.git > * gitk -> origin/gitk (new) I miss the "branch" designator, personally. I do like the "new" to differentiate from fast-forward. > * maint -> origin/maint > * master -> origin/master > * next -> origin/next > - pu -> origin/pu (refused) I think this needs to explain why it was refused (non-fast forward, refused). And you may still have: * pu -> origin/pu (non-fast forward) for forced updates. > ==> git://repo.or.cz/git/spearce.git > * tag v1.5.3.2 I am fine with that, as long as there aren't cases where we lose information (i.e., where the local and remote tag names differ). > Also, perhaps the trailing notes (fast forward, refused, etc.) should > be significantly indented to the right to stand out even further from > branch names that might be quite long. Again, we could probably fake that by fixing the minimum column width of the other fields. -Peff - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
