Web lists-archives.com

Re: [PATCH] range-diff: add a --no-patch option to show a summary




Hi Ævar,

On Tue, 6 Nov 2018, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:

> On Tue, Nov 06 2018, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, 5 Nov 2018, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
> >
> >> On Mon, Nov 05 2018, Eric Sunshine wrote:
> >>
> >> > On Mon, Nov 5, 2018 at 3:07 PM Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> >> Add a --no-patch option which shows which changes got removed, added
> >> >> or moved etc., without showing the diff associated with them.
> >> >
> >> > This option existed in the very first version[1] of range-diff (then
> >> > called branch-diff) implemented by Dscho, although it was called
> >> > --no-patches (with an "es"), which it inherited from tbdiff. I think
> >> > someone (possibly me) pointed out that --no-patch (sans "es") would be
> >> > more consistent with existing Git options. I don't recall why Dscho
> >> > removed the option during the re-rolls, but the explanation may be in
> >> > that thread.
> >>
> >> Thanks for digging. Big thread, not going to re-read it now. I'd just
> >> like to have this.
> >
> > In my hands, the well-documented `-s` option works (see e.g.
> > https://git-scm.com/docs/git-diff#git-diff--s), although I have to admit
> > that the `git-range-diff` manual does not talk about the diff-options.
> >
> > And for the record, for me, `git range-diff A...B --no-patch` *already*
> > works.
> 
> Neither of those works for me without my patch. E.g.
> 
>     ./git-range-diff -s 711aaa392f...a5ba8f2101
>     ./git-range-diff --no-patch 711aaa392f...a5ba8f2101
>
> This is on current next, 2.19.1.1182.g4ecb1133ce. What version are you
> on?

I tried it with git version 2.19.0.windows.1.

To verify, I repeated this with `next` (git version
2.19.1.1215.g8438c0b2453a):

./git range-diff -s 711aaa392f...a5ba8f2101
fatal: unrecognized argument: --output-indicator-new=>
error: could not parse log for 'a5ba8f2101..711aaa392f'

Which means that something broke rather dramatically between
v2.19.0.windows.1 and 8438c0b2453a.

Ciao,
Dscho

> 
> >>
> >> > I was also wondering if --summarize or --summary-only might be a
> >> > better name, describing the behavior at a higher level, but since
> >> > there is precedent for --no-patch (or --no-patches in tbdiff), perhaps
> >> > the name is fine as is.
> >>
> >> I think we should aim to keep a 1=1 mapping between range-diff and
> >> log/show options when possible, even though the output might have a
> >> slightly different flavor as my 4th paragraph discussing a potential
> >> --stat talks about.
> >>
> >> E.g. I can imagine that range-diff --no-patch --stat --summary would not
> >> show the patch, but a stat as described there, plus e.g. a "create
> >> mode..." if applicable.
> >>
> >> This change implements only a tiny fraction of that, but it would be
> >> very neat if we supported more stuff, and showed it in range-diff-y way,
> >> e.g. some compact format showing:
> >>
> >>     1 file changed, 3->2 insertions(+), 10->9 deletions(-)
> >>     create mode 100(6 -> 7)44 new-executable
> >>
> >> > The patch itself looks okay.
> >> >
> >> > [1]: https://public-inbox.org/git/8bc517e35d4842f8d9d98f3b99adb9475d6db2d2.1525361419.git.johannes.schindelin@xxxxxx/
> >>
>