From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Marc Branchaud Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] fetch: reduce duplicate in ref update status lines Date: Fri, 3 Jun 2016 16:00:01 -0400 Message-ID: <5751E1C1.8080507@xiplink.com> References: <20160522112019.26516-1-pclouds@gmail.com> <20160603110843.15434-1-pclouds@gmail.com> <20160603110843.15434-4-pclouds@gmail.com> <575199E7.7000503@xiplink.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: =?UTF-8?B?Tmd1eeG7hW4gVGjDoWkgTmfhu41jIER1eQ==?= , git@vger.kernel.org, Jeff King To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Jun 03 22:05:05 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1b8vGL-0003VL-Dl for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Fri, 03 Jun 2016 22:00:09 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932624AbcFCUAE (ORCPT ); Fri, 3 Jun 2016 16:00:04 -0400 Received: from smtp98.ord1c.emailsrvr.com ([108.166.43.98]:46521 "EHLO smtp98.ord1c.emailsrvr.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751818AbcFCUAD (ORCPT ); Fri, 3 Jun 2016 16:00:03 -0400 Received: from smtp21.relay.ord1c.emailsrvr.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp21.relay.ord1c.emailsrvr.com (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 4566A380229; Fri, 3 Jun 2016 16:00:02 -0400 (EDT) X-Auth-ID: mbranchaud@xiplink.com Received: by smtp21.relay.ord1c.emailsrvr.com (Authenticated sender: mbranchaud-AT-xiplink.com) with ESMTPSA id EAF813802F8; Fri, 3 Jun 2016 16:00:01 -0400 (EDT) X-Sender-Id: mbranchaud@xiplink.com Received: from [10.10.1.32] ([UNAVAILABLE]. [192.252.130.194]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA) by 0.0.0.0:465 (trex/5.5.4); Fri, 03 Jun 2016 16:00:02 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.8.0 In-Reply-To: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On 2016-06-03 01:04 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Marc Branchaud writes: > >> What if we detect when the full line exceeds the terminal width, and >> insert a newline after the remote ref and indent the -> to the same >> offset as its surrounding lines, like this: >> >> * [new branch] 2nd-index -> pclouds/2nd-index >> * [new branch] some-kind-of-long-ref-name >> -> pclouds/some-kind-of-long-ref-name >> * [new branch] 3nd-index -> pclouds/3nd-index > > I am OK with this format (not in the sense that I like it better > than what the patch produces, but in the sense that I do not have > strong preference either way). It may be hard to come up with a > good heuristics to decide where on the display width "->" should > come, though. I think aligning it with the -> on the other lines makes the most aesthetic sense. Are you worried that the right-hand-side ref might still wrap? I'm not too concerned about that -- there'll always be the possibility of a ref name that's longer than the terminal. >>> +When `from` and `to` share a common suffix, the line could be >>> +displayed in the form: >>> + >>> +------------------------------- >>> + { -> } () >> >> If we go with this format, we'll need to document . > > The sentence above calls it "a common suffix", so instead of saying > we can say perhaps? Or did you mean > something more than that? I missed that, and although I think it's an adequate description I think most readers will miss it too. They eye tends to notice the syntax-description bits then skip down to the list of element descriptions to understand which bits mean what. My brain wants to find "suffix" in that list. Anyway, not a major issue, really. M.