John Szakmeister [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
When I added -c/--cc, I contemplated making -p imply --cc, but
decided against it primarily because it is a change in traditional
behaviour, and it is easy for users to say --cc instead of -p from
the command line.
FWIW, security aside, I would've like to have seen that. I find it
confusing that merge commits that introduce code don't have a diff
shown when using -p. And I find it hard to remember --cc. BTW,
what's the mnemonic for it? -p => patch, --cc => ?
Compact combined.
By the way, these options are _not_ about "showing merge commits
that introduce code", and they do not help your kind of "security".
As I repeatedly said, you would need "-p -m" for that.
On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 12:37 PM, Junio C Hamano [off-list ref] wrote:
John Szakmeister [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
quoted
When I added -c/--cc, I contemplated making -p imply --cc, but
decided against it primarily because it is a change in traditional
behaviour, and it is easy for users to say --cc instead of -p from
the command line.
FWIW, security aside, I would've like to have seen that. I find it
confusing that merge commits that introduce code don't have a diff
shown when using -p. And I find it hard to remember --cc. BTW,
what's the mnemonic for it? -p => patch, --cc => ?
Compact combined.
Thank you.
By the way, these options are _not_ about "showing merge commits
that introduce code", and they do not help your kind of "security".
As I repeatedly said, you would need "-p -m" for that.
I'm sorry, I didn't mean to imply that it's useful for security, just
that it better meets my expectations when -p is turned on. I realize
there are some edges in the logic, but I'm fine with those edges.
-John