Re: What's in git.git (stable)

On Thursday 2006 December 14 10:21, Junio C Hamano wrote:

You keep repeating that you want to know the object name of the

Oh dear, you're right; I am terribly repetative.  Sorry.
Oh dear, you're right; I am terribly repetative.  Sorry.

;-)

But you never communicate with your own git repository using the
SHA-1 object names when talking about commits you made recently

How's this then:

$ git commit
$ git commit
$ git commit
$ git reset HEAD^^^

"AGGGHHHHHH!  I meant HEAD^^"

At this point I start running "git-prune -n | grep commit" and some liberal 
use of git-show to try and find the hash of the object so I can do

$ git reset --hard HASH_OF_OBJECT_I_STUPIDLY_ORPHANED

So I do not think "git commit" is a valid example.  I also agree
with Shawn that "git add" that says 6781 files were added is
pointless.

Okay.

quoted

I've always thought that programs that needed an expert/beginner split
were badly designed.

There probably is a truth in that.  Let's not add verbosity
unnecessarily.

My habit is always to be overly verbose in program output; however, I realise 
that not everybody likes that.  None of these things cause me any difficulty 
in my use of git.  However, my Dad also is an engineer, but he's not so 
comfortable with VCS; for him almost every part of git is a mystery.  
Commands that run and don't say anything are confusing because he didn't 
really know what they were /meant/ to do; he's just got a set of recipes that 
he knows to type.  He's probably an extreme case, and not a good model for 
typical user - on the other hand, I would say that if he can use it, then it 
is officially newbie-friendly. :-)

I agree with you that making some commands with progress
indication less chatty would be a good clean-up.

These are actually the ones I feel more strongly about.  Too much output just 
drowns out the information that people really need.


Andy

-- 
Dr Andy Parkins, M Eng (hons), MIEE