On Fri, 19 Oct 2007, Santi Béjar wrote: > Another possibility is with just some minor reductions from the > current output, as: > > $ git fetch spearce > ... > >From git://repo.or.cz/git/spearce > * spearce/gitk: fast forward to branch 'gitk' > old..new: 0d6df4d..2b5afb7 > * spearce/maint: fast forward to branch 'maint' > old..new: 1aa3d01..e7187e4 > * spearce/master: fast forward to branch 'master' > old..new: de61e42..7840ce6 > * spearce/next: fast forward to branch 'next' > old..new: 895be02..2fe5433 > * spearce/pu: forcing update to non-fast forward branch 'pu' > old...new: 89fa332...1e4c517 > > This way it is slightly less terse than the other proposals but not > that cryptic and it normally fits in one line without padding. And I > really like to see what has changed explicitly with the old..new line. I think the advantage of having only one line of output per branch really outweight the need for old..new notation. Do you really benefit from it? Nicolas
