Santi B?jar wrote:
>On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 3:12 PM, Johannes Schindelin
><Johannes.Schindelin@xxxxxx> wrote:
>> Sure it is. But cluttering up the commands for something that is not
>> really proven to be wanted by many is IMO inferior.
>This is an argument against git-whatzzup.sh in general. Point taken.
Not really. It's an argument against cluttering up the existing core
with this stuff.
>Moreover, this could be integrated in "git status".
I personally have no need for such a thing, but in effect it is the git
commandline equivalent of MS-Office "Clippy", which provides a hands-on
tutorial in git while you are trying to use it (with the subtle yet
important difference that it only provides advice when called).
So if you'd keep it confined to a shell script externally from the core
commands, I could imagine a lot of new (or occasional) users of git being
rather happy with an "interactive manual/hands-on tutorial" like this.
--
Sincerely, srb@xxxxxxx
Stephen R. van den Berg.
Skiing beyond this point may result in death and/or loss of skiing privileges.
--
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
