Re: [PATCH] range-diff: add a --no-patch option to show a summary

From: Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>
To: "Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason" <avarab@gmail.com>
Cc: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>,
	Git List <git@vger.kernel.org>,
	Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>,
	lucas.demarchi@intel.com, Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] range-diff: add a --no-patch option to show a summary
Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2018 11:43:36 +0100 (STD)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <nycvar.QRO.7.76.6.1811061140560.45@tvgsbejvaqbjf.bet> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87efbz6xys.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2351 bytes --]

Hi,

On Mon, 5 Nov 2018, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:

> On Mon, Nov 05 2018, Eric Sunshine wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Nov 5, 2018 at 3:07 PM Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Add a --no-patch option which shows which changes got removed, added
> >> or moved etc., without showing the diff associated with them.
> >
> > This option existed in the very first version[1] of range-diff (then
> > called branch-diff) implemented by Dscho, although it was called
> > --no-patches (with an "es"), which it inherited from tbdiff. I think
> > someone (possibly me) pointed out that --no-patch (sans "es") would be
> > more consistent with existing Git options. I don't recall why Dscho
> > removed the option during the re-rolls, but the explanation may be in
> > that thread.
>
> Thanks for digging. Big thread, not going to re-read it now. I'd just
> like to have this.

In my hands, the well-documented `-s` option works (see e.g.
https://git-scm.com/docs/git-diff#git-diff--s), although I have to admit
that the `git-range-diff` manual does not talk about the diff-options.

And for the record, for me, `git range-diff A...B --no-patch` *already*
works.

Ciao,
Dscho

>
> > I was also wondering if --summarize or --summary-only might be a
> > better name, describing the behavior at a higher level, but since
> > there is precedent for --no-patch (or --no-patches in tbdiff), perhaps
> > the name is fine as is.
>
> I think we should aim to keep a 1=1 mapping between range-diff and
> log/show options when possible, even though the output might have a
> slightly different flavor as my 4th paragraph discussing a potential
> --stat talks about.
>
> E.g. I can imagine that range-diff --no-patch --stat --summary would not
> show the patch, but a stat as described there, plus e.g. a "create
> mode..." if applicable.
>
> This change implements only a tiny fraction of that, but it would be
> very neat if we supported more stuff, and showed it in range-diff-y way,
> e.g. some compact format showing:
>
>     1 file changed, 3->2 insertions(+), 10->9 deletions(-)
>     create mode 100(6 -> 7)44 new-executable
>
> > The patch itself looks okay.
> >
> > [1]: https://public-inbox.org/git/8bc517e35d4842f8d9d98f3b99adb9475d6db2d2.1525361419.git.johannes.schindelin@gmx.de/
>