Peter Samuelson wrote: >>> +1, except I'd condense --diff-all and --show-all-paths to a single >>> additional option named, I dunno, --full-revision. </bikeshed> > > [Julian Foad] >> My latest thought in that area is like I listed above except omitting >> the --diff-all option entirely -- after all, nobody has requested it >> and it doesn't seem especially useful to me. > > Well, "nobody has requested it" is meaningless, since they already have > it today, with '--diff'.
Actually no: --diff currently shows the diff of the subtree at the specified main target path only, not of the whole revision. > But... either way. I note that it's also > what 'git diff' does (annoying, but 'git diff .' is a simple > workaround). > >> Obviously we need the --show-all-paths option for back-compat. (If >> your suggestion of '--full-revision' meant 'show all paths and show >> all diffs', then that would not be suitable for back-compat, would >> it, because what we need is show all paths but no diffs.) > > No, I meant '--diff --full-revision' or '--show-paths --full-revision'. > In fact I'd shorten --show-paths to --paths, to match --diff. And > --full-revision could perhaps be shorter as well. That makes sense, as one reasonable option. So we have plenty of interest in this, and ideas for the UI. Do we have anybody who might step up to implement it? - Julian
