On Tue, Oct 07, 2008 at 07:52:02AM +0200, Johannes Sixt wrote:
> How about this: If I run 'git show -- foo.doc' (foo.doc resolves to a
> single path, obviously), I want MS Word, but for other uses of 'git show'
> I don't. I think that heuristics could be very effective: With a plain
> 'git show' I get the overview of the change, and with 'git show --
> foo.doc' I drill down into a single document.
Hrm. I am not opposed to heuristics, but in this case, I don't like the
one you have proposed. ;P
My specific case that prompted this work is a repository full of
pictures and videos, where I rarely (if ever) change the media content,
but frequently change exif tags. So my "usual" case is to want to see
"git log -p" with the textconv'd version. The commit diffs are otherwise
totally meaningless.
But I think for many others, they are primarily working with text data,
but have some (for example) binary word processor documents. Triggering
such conversions for a single file might make more sense there.
So I'm not sure there is a heuristic that serves both desires. Which is
why I would lean towards a command-line argument, backed by a config
option for those repositories which really want it all the time (and let
me reiterate that such a config option would still have _no_ impact on
plumbing; applying text conversion there is just plain wrong).
> Or this: 'git show -p' uses the textconv'd version, 'git show' does not
> ("Binary files differ").
At that point, is there really an advantage over "git show --textconv"?
> BTW, also with 'git diff' I sometimes don't want MS Word to pop up...
Yes. It is annoying that git can't simply read our minds. :)
-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
