Ted Pavlic <ted@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > It could be improved by supporting a command-line flag that would mimic > the "git commit -v"-type behavior of opening the diff in the same window > as the commit message. This would extend existing commands like "stg > edit" that do not already have a "-v"-type option. If a single-buffer operation is an improvement, then I do not see the point of this script. * Some people would like two-buffer operation and they may use this script as their core.editor. * Other people (including me) would find it very natural to use "\C-x 2" if they need to look at two places of the same buffer, because that is what they are used to do when editing a long file every day. They just use "commit -v" without bothering with this script. * Yet other people (like Dscho) would find it too late to have a chance for final review when writing a commit log message anyway, and won't use either. And I think choice is good. Having said that, if the lack of "final chance to review the diff" in some StGIT subcommand is the real problem you are trying to solve, I think it is better solved by fixing StGIT. If this script can be used as a substitute for the real solution, that may be a welcome unintended side effect, but I do not think you should make it the main selling point of the script. After all people may not want to use this script when they are working directly with git, but still would want StGIT fixed. -- 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
