On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 12:29 PM, Michael J Gruber <git@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Jeff King venit, vidit, dixit 10.02.2009 12:03: >> On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 01:51:07AM +0100, Tuncer Ayaz wrote: > ... >> 3. What advantage does this have over just doing: >> >> (git diff --name-status; >> git diff --cached --name-status) | sort -k2 > > That is fine, except that it can't list untracked files. > >> What options are available? It looks like this is intimately tied with >> "commit", which I think is one of the _shortcomings_ of the current >> status. It means the command line options are non-intuitive for what >> people generally want to say: "what is changed, possibly limiting to >> some path". > > Right now, "git status" is basically "git commit --dry-run", which may > or may not be good, but certainly is not what people coming from other > vcs expect. I would suggest having "git commit -n" replace "git status" > if I hadn't done so already or if I dared to (I can't remember ;) ). > > The softer approach was naming "shortstatus" what those people would > expect for "status". > > The "git diff" based solution does almost everything, but back then it > wasn't clear how to get at the untracked and ignored files. In fact, > that would have the benefit that output from "git diff --name-status > commitA commitB" is guaranteed to stay consistent with "git diff > --name-status HEAD WORKTREE", "git diff --name-status INDEX WORKTREE" > and the three-way diff between HEAD, INDEX and WORKTREE which > shortstatus really is (WORKTREE meaning full wt with untrcaked/ignored > files). > > "git ls-files" may do but has a different set of mode characters. I > think that sums up what preceeded Junio's patch from October. For reference: http://markmail.org/message/tqvshvcj2ybgj6ea -- 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
