* [BUG] In git-log, --name-status flag overrides the --patch flag
@ 2020-12-20 4:23 Érico Rolim
2020-12-21 13:16 ` Đoàn Trần Công Danh
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Érico Rolim @ 2020-12-20 4:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: git
Hi!
When using the command
git log --patch --name-status
It seems the name-status flag somehow overrides the patch flag, by which I mean
that I get the same output as simply running
git log --name-status
It would be nice for the combination of these two flags to work, as it would
allow one to view both a summary of changed files as well as the changes
themselves, at the same time.
Happy holidays,
Érico
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [BUG] In git-log, --name-status flag overrides the --patch flag
2020-12-20 4:23 [BUG] In git-log, --name-status flag overrides the --patch flag Érico Rolim
@ 2020-12-21 13:16 ` Đoàn Trần Công Danh
2020-12-21 19:09 ` Junio C Hamano
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Đoàn Trần Công Danh @ 2020-12-21 13:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Érico Rolim; +Cc: git
On 2020-12-20 01:23:05-0300, Érico Rolim <erico.erc@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi!
>
> When using the command
>
> git log --patch --name-status
>
> It seems the name-status flag somehow overrides the patch flag, by which I mean
> that I get the same output as simply running
>
> git log --name-status
>
> It would be nice for the combination of these two flags to work, as it would
> allow one to view both a summary of changed files as well as the changes
> themselves, at the same time.
I'm not arguing if this your expectation is make sense or not,
however, the Documentation says something about "Show only"...
Anyway, --patch-with-raw provides more information than
--patch --name-status combined.
I guess it's too much information?
--
Danh
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [BUG] In git-log, --name-status flag overrides the --patch flag
2020-12-21 13:16 ` Đoàn Trần Công Danh
@ 2020-12-21 19:09 ` Junio C Hamano
2020-12-23 23:54 ` Đoàn Trần Công Danh
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Junio C Hamano @ 2020-12-21 19:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Đoàn Trần Công Danh; +Cc: Érico Rolim, git
Đoàn Trần Công Danh <congdanhqx@gmail.com> writes:
> On 2020-12-20 01:23:05-0300, Érico Rolim <erico.erc@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi!
>>
>> When using the command
>>
>> git log --patch --name-status
>>
>> It seems the name-status flag somehow overrides the patch flag, by which I mean
>> that I get the same output as simply running
>>
>> git log --name-status
>>
>> It would be nice for the combination of these two flags to work, as it would
>> allow one to view both a summary of changed files as well as the changes
>> themselves, at the same time.
>
> I'm not arguing if this your expectation is make sense or not,
> however, the Documentation says something about "Show only"...
Perhaps the documentation would need to be clarified? I suspect
this is not very useful combination [*1*] and if this were years
ago, I would suggest making the command line error out, instead of
silently ignore one and keep the other one in effect.
[Footnote]
*1* "--patch --stat --summmary" was designed as the standard "both a
summary as well as the changes".
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread* Re: [BUG] In git-log, --name-status flag overrides the --patch flag
2020-12-21 19:09 ` Junio C Hamano
@ 2020-12-23 23:54 ` Đoàn Trần Công Danh
0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Đoàn Trần Công Danh @ 2020-12-23 23:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Junio C Hamano; +Cc: Érico Rolim, git
On 2020-12-21 11:09:58-0800, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
> Đoàn Trần Công Danh <congdanhqx@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > On 2020-12-20 01:23:05-0300, Érico Rolim <erico.erc@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Hi!
> >>
> >> When using the command
> >>
> >> git log --patch --name-status
> >>
> >> It seems the name-status flag somehow overrides the patch flag, by which I mean
> >> that I get the same output as simply running
> >>
> >> git log --name-status
> >>
> >> It would be nice for the combination of these two flags to work, as it would
> >> allow one to view both a summary of changed files as well as the changes
> >> themselves, at the same time.
> >
> > I'm not arguing if this your expectation is make sense or not,
> > however, the Documentation says something about "Show only"...
>
> Perhaps the documentation would need to be clarified?
Honestly, I think documentation is fine, "Show only"... should mean
only.
>
> I suspect
> this is not very useful combination [*1*] and if this were years
> ago, I would suggest making the command line error out, instead of
> silently ignore one and keep the other one in effect.
Although, I don't have strong opinion on this combination,
I would say yes, and we should error out for other combination like
--name-status --patch too. And Érico, in a reply to me, said he would
prefer seeing an error instead of silencely discard one option.
I'll look into the implementation in this weekend.
>
>
> [Footnote]
>
> *1* "--patch --stat --summmary" was designed as the standard "both a
> summary as well as the changes".
--
Danh
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2020-12-23 23:58 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2020-12-20 4:23 [BUG] In git-log, --name-status flag overrides the --patch flag Érico Rolim
2020-12-21 13:16 ` Đoàn Trần Công Danh
2020-12-21 19:09 ` Junio C Hamano
2020-12-23 23:54 ` Đoàn Trần Công Danh
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://80x24.org/mirrors/git.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).