Re: [PATCHv5 1/3] wt-status.*: better advices for git status added

[konglu@minatec.inpg.fr]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain; charset=";"; format=flowed	DelSp=Yes, Size: 1364 bytes --]


Matthieu Moy <Matthieu.Moy@grenoble-inp.fr> a écrit :

>> +	if (state->merge_in_progress)
>> +		merge_in_progress_show(s, state, state_color);
>> +	else if (state->am_in_progress)
>> +		am_in_progress_show(s, state, state_color);
>> +	else if (state->rebase_in_progress ||  
>> state->rebase_interactive_in_progress)
>> +		rebase_in_progress_show(s, state, state_color);
>> +	else if (state->cherry_pick_in_progress)
>> +		cherry_pick_in_progress_show(s, state, state_color);
>> +	if (state->bisect_in_progress)
>> +		bisect_in_progress_show(s, state, state_color);
>
> I still disagree with the "else if" logic here. If the user started two
> operations, I think we should show both messages.

We show both messages in the case of bisect. However, we decided to
implement a priority for the other cases because of how the code figures
out the current state.
The cases in which you're in 'am' AND 'rebase' or only in 'am' is hard to
handle. Thus The priority is given to the 'am' because running 'am' during
a 'rebase' is possible (and the other way is not).
On top of that, I think that the user only needs to know his "most recent"
current state. Given that he's running 'am' during a 'rebase', knowing that
he's in am progress is enough. If he finishes the 'am', then he will still
know that he's in a 'rebase' with 'git status'.