On Sat, Jun 6, 2015 at 12:03 AM, Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobox.com> wrote: > Tay Ray Chuan <rcta...@gmail.com> writes: > >> Would it be a good idea to have a --diff-only option to include diff, >> but not status output? Or perhaps a --diff option, while leaving it to >> the user to specify if status output is to be included with >> --no-status, which would open the doors for mixing and matching status >> formatting control, eg. with --short. > > The name "--diff-only" does not sound right, as people would wonder > what should happen when you give "--status --diff-only". > > Perhaps you would need to do some careful thinking, similar to what > we did when deciding the "diff" and "log" options. > > We originally had "--patch" and then "--patch-with-stat" to "diff" > and "log", but soon after that people found that "show only stat > without the patch text" is a useful thing to do. We retrofitted the > command line parser to take "--patch" and "--stat" as orthogonal but > inter-related options, which was a successful conversion that did > not break backward compatibility (These days people would not even > know that these strangely combined forms "--patch-with-stat" and > "--patch-with-raw" even exist). > > All of the above assumes that showing only the patch and not other > hints to help situation awareness while making a commit is a useful > thing in the first place. I am undecided on that point myself.
Hmm, perhaps such functionality should be off-loaded to a third-party wrapper. (I'd not be surprised if most wrappers already have this.) -- Cheers, Ray Chuan -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
