Re: [PATCH v7 0/3]

On Fri, Feb 1, 2019 at 2:54 PM Junio C Hamano [off-list ref] wrote:

As you can see in "git shortlog --no-merges", later two patches
would look quite out of place by having overlong title and starting
the description(i.e. after "<area>: ") in a capital letter.

Hadn't looked at it that way. OK, will shorten/uncapitalize.

It is still not clear why we would want 2/3, even though I think 3/3
is a good idea.

It's interesting to me that you like 3/3 but not 2/3 :)

My apologies for restating the commit message, but the point of 2/3 is
to communicate to the user that highlighted/marked branches will
behave differently from unhighlighted/unmarked branches for commands
to check out or delete. I think this is useful since it gives the user
actionable information ahead of time, as opposed to providing that
information upon failure of checkout/delete. It also makes sense since
'git branch' is already highlighting the current branch, i.e. this is
just an extension of that idea.

As we've stated earlier in this thread, 1/3 allows for users to
implement this on their own with a custom git branch format.
Personally I think there's value in making it default, since it's
adding information in a minimally intrusive way. I do believe that
merely adding information isn't a good enough reason to change things,
as information overload is a real thing, but in this case the output
isn't changed for anyone not using a worktree (same goes for 3/3), and
for someone using a worktree this provides useful and actionable
information, IMO.

Does that change your mind at all?