Re: [PATCH] Fix formatting in git-config(1)
From: Junio C Hamano <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-15 22:54:10
Andreas Schwab [off-list ref] writes:
Junio C Hamano [off-list ref] writes:quoted
Junio C Hamano [off-list ref] writes:quoted
Andreas Schwab [off-list ref] writes:quoted
Remove the open block markers from the status.showUntrackedFiles entry as they cause all remaining entries to be indented one level too much.Hrm... I looked at http://git-htmldocs.googlecode.com/git/git-config.html and am unsure what "one level too much" you are referring to. Also looking at the output from $ git config --help I see (RHS end truncated to avoid line wrapping in MUA): status.showUntrackedFiles By default, git-status(1) and git-commit(1) show files whi tracked by Git. Directories which contain only untracked f the directory name only. Showing untracked files means tha lstat() all all the files in the whole repository, which m systems. So, this variable controls how the commands displ files. Possible values are: · no - Show no untracked files. · normal - Show untracked files and directories. · all - Show also individual files in untracked directo If this variable is not specified, it defaults to normal. overridden with the -u|--untracked-files option of git-sta commit(1).Worse yet, with AsciiDoc 8.5.2, here is what I see with your patch (again, RHS end truncated to avoid line wrapping in MUA): status.showUntrackedFiles By default, git-status(1) and git-commit(1) show files w Directories which contain only untracked files, are show Showing untracked files means that Git needs to lstat() repository, which might be slow on some systems. So, thi displays the untracked files. Possible values are: * no - Show no untracked files. * normal - Show untracked files and directories. * all - Show also individual files in untracked direc If this variable is not specified, it defaults to n with the -u|--untracked-files option of git-status( So...I get this layout no matter what, with and without the block markers, both with version 8.4.5 and 8.6.6. But with the block markers the remaining entries are indented too much. So...
So with your patch, users of AsciiDoc 8.5.2 will be harmed by the same breakage as you get with 8.4.5 and 8.6.6 with or without your patch, and without your patch, users of AsciiDoc 8.5.2 gets a lot more reasonable output than with your patch? Can't we have a patch that makes everybody happier than what each is currently seeing---that would be a progress without regression to anybody.