Michael J Gruber [off-list ref] writes:
- OPT_BIT( 0, "porcelain", &flags, "machine-readable output", TRANSPORT_PUSH_PORCELAIN),
+ OPT_BIT( 0, "porcelain", &flags, "show porcelain output format", TRANSPORT_PUSH_PORCELAIN),
Thanks, but I wonder if machine-readable is more descriptive than
"porcelain output format", iow, updating commit/status may be better.
The option was meant to mean "output format for Porcelain script writers
to stay machine readable" but it can be misunderstood as "output format
a Porcelain command would produce with chromes and glitters".
Heya,
On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 20:53, Junio C Hamano [off-list ref] wrote:
The option was meant to mean "output format for Porcelain script writers
to stay machine readable" but it can be misunderstood as "output format
a Porcelain command would produce with chromes and glitters".
I've always thought this to be a rather awkward option name. If it had
been named '--plumbing' there'd be no room for such misunderstanding,
it outputs it a format suitable for use by, and as plumbing. Perhaps
something to remember for the future, or would we want to stay
consistent with the current --porcelain?
--
Cheers,
Sverre Rabbelier
Junio C Hamano venit, vidit, dixit 14.02.2011 20:53:
Michael J Gruber [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
- OPT_BIT( 0, "porcelain", &flags, "machine-readable output", TRANSPORT_PUSH_PORCELAIN),
+ OPT_BIT( 0, "porcelain", &flags, "show porcelain output format", TRANSPORT_PUSH_PORCELAIN),
Thanks, but I wonder if machine-readable is more descriptive than
"porcelain output format", iow, updating commit/status may be better.
The option was meant to mean "output format for Porcelain script writers
to stay machine readable" but it can be misunderstood as "output format
a Porcelain command would produce with chromes and glitters".
I'm happy with that, too. Generally, I tried to go with the majority
with this unifying series. In fact, we've been unhappy with the name of
that option as well, but the usage text is easier to change.
Michael