Re: [RFC/PATCH] shortstatus v1

Quoting Junio C Hamano [off-list ref]:

Jeff King [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

Some comments:

  1. Is the staggered indentation intentional? It looks awful, and the
     only use I can think of is to separate unstaged from staged
     changes. But surely there must be a more obvious way of doing so.

Probably not.

quoted

  2. Why do staged changes get a letter marking what happened, but
     unstaged changes do not?

Bug?   FWIW, the original patch from October shows:

    M changed
M   M changed-again
M     changed-staged
    D deleted
D     deleted-staged

(where changed-again has both staged changes and further changes in the
work tree).

The gap between these two are to show the rename similarity index, which
we could do without.

I have a question. Why do you have the gap for the rename similarity between the two but not between the second status and the filename?