Ramkumar Ramachandra <artag...@gmail.com> writes: > Junio C Hamano wrote: >> Sounds like you are saying that you can pile a new command on top of >> new command to solve what the existing tools people are familar with >> can already solve in a consistent way without adding anything new. >> Are you going to dupliate various options to "git diff" and "git >> log" in "git diff-link"? Will you then next need "git log-link"? > > What I'm saying is: As always, we start with plumbing and work our way > up to porcelain. We do have git diff-files, diff-index, diff-tree, so > I don't see what the problem with diff-link is. The point is that we > can get an initial scripted version out quickly. > > And no, I never suggested a git log-link.
"git log -p .gitmodules" would be a way to review what changed in the information about submodules. Don't you need "git log-link" for exactly the same reason why you need "git diff-link" in the first place? So you may not have suggested it, but I suspect that was only because you haven't had enough time to think things through. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
