On Mon, Oct 23, 2023 at 08:16:42PM +0200, Oswald Buddenhagen wrote: > On Mon, Oct 23, 2023 at 10:30:54AM -0700, Jacob Stopak wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 23, 2023 at 04:34:15PM +0200, Dragan Simic wrote: > > > On 2023-10-23 12:52, Oswald Buddenhagen wrote: > > > > i for one think that it would be a perfectly valid experiment to go > > > > all-in and beyond with jacob's proposal - _and make it the default_ > > > > > > I'd never support that, FWIW. > > > > FWIW, I'd _never suggest_ that. > > > why, though? > doing that would extend the feature's reach about two orders of magnitude > among newbies, which is where it matters most. To be honest it never even popped into my head to contemplate that and how the user experience might be impacted by making it the default. I assume the big distinction is "would it help more users than it would annoy"? I always saw this feature as a helper to be invoked when the user is in need as opposed to a default, similar to the -n dry run option on some commands. For brand new users, I can see what you mean since they would likely not know the --table format exists unless being instructed by someone else. It would be kindof a shame for this capability to exist but not be taken advantage of by the folks who need it most - the newbies running "git status" literally for the very first time. But the main drawback is that although the --table for status does provide some visual clarity and tangibility, the status command doesn't actually _do_ anything, so the arrows showing how changes move around don't apply. Those arrows showing how things move only really apply to "simulating" (dry runs) for specific commands like add, restore, rm, commit, stash, etc, so making the --table proposal a default status output would still miss those scenarios. However, now that I'm thinking about it maybe it could somehow be included in the Hints feature? I honestly don't know exactly when the hints are currently invoked or how much detail they go into, but what just popped into my head is kindof a "universal dry run" option, which would show the user the --table format hint when they invoke an applicable command, and prompt them if they actually want to run it. > > > I very much value Git's current usage and wouldn't dream to make this > > the default. > > > making the default output format somewhat more verbose wouldn't really > "change the usage", though. and being able to permanently get rid of it with > a single command should alleviate any _reasonable_ concerns about habit > disruption. > > regards It's a good point too that people surprised or annoyed or disgusted by the change of a longstanding status output format could just disable the configuration with a single config command...
