From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 66B111F8C2 for ; Fri, 12 Feb 2021 22:26:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S231249AbhBLWWT (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Feb 2021 17:22:19 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp21.pobox.com ([173.228.157.53]:63402 "EHLO pb-smtp21.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229583AbhBLWWR (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Feb 2021 17:22:17 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp21.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 13FD5127910; Fri, 12 Feb 2021 17:21:35 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=l3lrkL6Zq+cLebucJa6XtA+e2lw=; b=TqeZGo /zBPtrpeqeGTFVAB5O3DP196+ToGeyanUlllp98nXbgH/iu5UxPE0smZb/va45jp 39vDYhSjqx9qeraD8l0+g1WVPJm2E4l/+nZwFllZHnk8dyt6XNS8kV3Al4b7osGX AZ78NkvVvxGIBnQxnPa+NZ6/OpgEVvdPsaZfY= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=PcEv7MZV7nvtLGxf0FOa+y7KZw9CH8OO RzpVIeV25VS85o+ZrYb8l7pIJybimvy+DEluByEgKh2yM9/BtVCkenTgTW+Bzwy9 5W5Pa3GgCT37qK8628XR8aoE5I8qkX0PlXYLuACE72V5LBJ+WkLEnLl+lRb7Qevk 0OWZL/XsDto= Received: from pb-smtp21.sea.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D0D912790F; Fri, 12 Feb 2021 17:21:35 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [35.243.138.161]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 05DDE12790B; Fri, 12 Feb 2021 17:21:30 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: David Aguilar Cc: Nicholas Guriev , Git Mailing List Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] mergetools: support difftool.tabbed setting References: <2fb58fd30ae730ccd3e88ec51b5fe6d80ab7a8c7.camel@guriev.su> Date: Fri, 12 Feb 2021 14:21:29 -0800 In-Reply-To: (David Aguilar's message of "Thu, 11 Feb 2021 21:51:24 -0800") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.1.90 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: A8375F9A-6D80-11EB-81A2-D609E328BF65-77302942!pb-smtp21.pobox.com Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org David Aguilar writes: > I'm not really sure if "tabbed" is the best name for what's going on, > though. It's really more of a "diff everything in one shot" mode, and > it just so happens that the tools in question use tabs. This statement matches my reaction to this new feature exactly. The way the external commands are triggered via GIT_EXTERNAL_DIFF mechanism makes it "easy" to show changes for one path at a time and "hard" to do so for all paths at once, but the resulting end-user experience that is forced to view one path at a time may be awkward. > That said, I wonder whether we need this new feature, or whether we > should instead improve an existing one. I'm leaning towards improving > the existing dir-diff feature as a better alternative. ... As a non-user, I have no strong opinion on the "new feature"; other than that I trust your judgement on the "difftool" design issues, that is. Thanks.