Re: [PATCH 0/3] pretty: format aliases
From: Jeff King <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-15 22:48:42
On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 12:57:08PM -0500, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
quoted
To be clear, I don't have any problem with the _functionality_. I just think it probably should have been log.pretty, or pretty.default or something. Too late now, though.Ah, sorry to be dense. Maybe something like the following would work: [log "format"] changelog = "* [%h] %s"
We usually reserve the [log "format"] for when "format" can be an arbitrary string. I'm not sure if we can use some nicer syntax like [log.format]; I'd have to experiment.
This is rev-list’s code, and log is its most noticeable manifestation.
We also tend to refer to the log/show/whatchanged as "the log family of commands". I think whatchanged is pretty much dead and historical at this point, though.
By the way: I just noticed today that rev-list is not very friendly when given a --pretty=format: specification: $ git rev-list -1 --oneline HEAD 651b91e log --format=email: fix confusing variable name $ git rev-list -1 --format='%h %s' HEAD commit 651b91ef7a15a46145d65193c8709670b969161f 651b91e log --format=email: fix confusing variable name Is this deliberate? I mention it because I seem to remember from the discussion of --decorate configuration that scripts should be using rev-list in preference to log even when a --format option is involved.
I'm not sure it's deliberate, as in somebody thought it was a good idea. But it has always been that way, and I think it has been deliberate that we not change it. I agree it is unfriendly. I think we have accepted that scripts will use log because of its enhanced features (gitk does), but we generally suppress extra output (like decorations or notes) for at least --pretty=raw and --pretty=format. -Peff