Re: [PATCH 1/5] status: document the -v/--verbose option

Junio writes:

Michael Haggerty [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

Document `git status -v`, including its new doubled `-vv` form.

Signed-off-by: Michael Haggerty <redacted>
---

Will queue on mg/status-v-v series, which did add description for
"commit -v", but "status -v" did not have the description to begin
with and we missed it.

[...]

quoted

+-v::
+--verbose::
+ In addition to the names of files that have been changed, also
+ show the textual changes that are staged to be committed
+ (i.e., like the output of `git diff`). If `-v` is specified

Should this be `git diff --cached`?

quoted

+ twice, then also show the changes in the working tree that
+ have not yet been staged (i.e., like the output of `git diff
+ --cached`).

...and should this just be `git diff`?

--Pete

(Sorry for not replying to the email; bit of a mess here in my setup.)

On 04/24/2015 02:27 AM, Pete Harlan wrote:

Junio writes:

quoted

Michael Haggerty [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

Document `git status -v`, including its new doubled `-vv` form.

Signed-off-by: Michael Haggerty <redacted>
---

Will queue on mg/status-v-v series, which did add description for
"commit -v", but "status -v" did not have the description to begin
with and we missed it.

[...]

quoted

quoted

+-v::
+--verbose::
+ In addition to the names of files that have been changed, also
+ show the textual changes that are staged to be committed
+ (i.e., like the output of `git diff`). If `-v` is specified

Should this be `git diff --cached`?

quoted

quoted

+ twice, then also show the changes in the working tree that
+ have not yet been staged (i.e., like the output of `git diff
+ --cached`).

...and should this just be `git diff`?

Yes, you're right. Thanks for catching this, Pete. The shorter the
patch, the higher the error density :-(

Michael

-- 
Michael Haggerty
mhagger@alum.mit.edu