From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4A892C433E0 for ; Wed, 23 Dec 2020 23:56:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 06AD720724 for ; Wed, 23 Dec 2020 23:56:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727183AbgLWXzn (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Dec 2020 18:55:43 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:36846 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727029AbgLWXzm (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Dec 2020 18:55:42 -0500 Received: from mail-pf1-x429.google.com (mail-pf1-x429.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::429]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 82710C061794 for ; Wed, 23 Dec 2020 15:55:02 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-pf1-x429.google.com with SMTP id 11so332650pfu.4 for ; Wed, 23 Dec 2020 15:55:02 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to; bh=bFXlx1RiUHhweI15PdyL1ieAAneShrtWIC2xZMp2w+Q=; b=W00QLaklWg/YWlGjb2xe5OHnTMqNpFUmwVxOjw3ycU6Q+whr+hhGdiGxOZ7HIn/Lnf wTjeZt7azXvZ3qb42RFHO06K6YrhcUQqidl6nHr3rL88D0cf1EWEdX0w5sMzRAkPeUS0 gEkGduTU2lHeWUY4d7ZDhDuD1ZLZ0WxBkSvrwSm0YJyAYyiP6T7+UOtreDRaLnv2Jtrc QCDrQiPRXZ+fg3KjDOE0CnI2jvzzEc9oy+Znn+SnqkBIWFkMq1NAYHwJHmD+dN+FLFou VsR3IYw85paIzXw/9SchVj4A4nODV8VSmrFKZxSKpJdvI9/pjkcJn6Mv5apVTjD2pmU2 SNJw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding :in-reply-to; bh=bFXlx1RiUHhweI15PdyL1ieAAneShrtWIC2xZMp2w+Q=; b=pVLK4lG4c67pRTCkpKbDgOWMNPPHnbKMkseFEh3CWUq7+b7zbE0Exyt7DW6N+sfUe7 EfHg8nCWdC6VfmVAZ+7TA3elWogIQGmKNjBNK4JvVsyhYzb4t9ZqnY9hZEpCV9SQHP2q aDf/7YvMTNcN4tG1EFyRJ5fIMQaO4REs0SMaC6DRcvvwG1ev9rQv6rlnedgOboPmwT37 a6x9XPtKbA8qWXVvH/9Fe6HgIJvGo6yOtP16twcEUWMV+N7qKYNR9fh3FuHh5b+E+PEa gw+e/MhzBwDvmlaJWos424/AzAb8JWBYiOHUmjYYON9gISv2o1EDyKW4C1VbVYTzjL0N 1lPw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531mPNMoQ9+xhNvJZrsWWmunPdNgmS6eZge6Jzibk41/eWT0zNNt 3nbJl1ONrxCe0YjZkQbbENY= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyikwk/r4eYx2maTUHN6YN0wghVnPGtLt9Jx+IIUJLFco1l9kbyFhEt0olh0vHIMl9Barp03A== X-Received: by 2002:a63:2b42:: with SMTP id r63mr26026547pgr.316.1608767701947; Wed, 23 Dec 2020 15:55:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost ([2402:800:63a8:c764:b10d:95e8:e1a5:df80]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id q15sm13078092pgk.11.2020.12.23.15.55.00 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 23 Dec 2020 15:55:01 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 06:54:59 +0700 From: =?utf-8?B?xJBvw6BuIFRy4bqnbiBDw7RuZw==?= Danh To: Junio C Hamano Cc: =?utf-8?B?w4lyaWNv?= Rolim , git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [BUG] In git-log, --name-status flag overrides the --patch flag Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On 2020-12-21 11:09:58-0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Đoàn Trần Công Danh writes: > > > On 2020-12-20 01:23:05-0300, Érico Rolim wrote: > >> Hi! > >> > >> When using the command > >> > >> git log --patch --name-status > >> > >> It seems the name-status flag somehow overrides the patch flag, by which I mean > >> that I get the same output as simply running > >> > >> git log --name-status > >> > >> It would be nice for the combination of these two flags to work, as it would > >> allow one to view both a summary of changed files as well as the changes > >> themselves, at the same time. > > > > I'm not arguing if this your expectation is make sense or not, > > however, the Documentation says something about "Show only"... > > Perhaps the documentation would need to be clarified? Honestly, I think documentation is fine, "Show only"... should mean only. > > I suspect > this is not very useful combination [*1*] and if this were years > ago, I would suggest making the command line error out, instead of > silently ignore one and keep the other one in effect. Although, I don't have strong opinion on this combination, I would say yes, and we should error out for other combination like --name-status --patch too. And Érico, in a reply to me, said he would prefer seeing an error instead of silencely discard one option. I'll look into the implementation in this weekend. > > > [Footnote] > > *1* "--patch --stat --summmary" was designed as the standard "both a > summary as well as the changes". -- Danh