On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 7:06 PM, Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobox.com> wrote:
> Existing scripts by definition would not be using a new option you > will invent that used not to be a valid one. So that would be one > way that you can shorten your script without breaking other people. True. If it was only for shortening my script, I still could do "> /dev/null 2>&1" which is just as short (or long) as a newly introduced "--really-quiet" option. But I'm also concerned about consistency and making options do what they sound they would do. > In "git rev-list ... | git diff-tree --stdin" output, the commit > object name is absolutely necessary, with or without --quiet, as it Why is printing the object name also necessary with "--quiet"? I'd argue that any script that uses diff-tree that way uses --stdin without --quiet, just like you do in your example, so suppressing the object name if "--quiet" is given probably would not break as many scripts as you think. > But we do not live in an ideal world. True, but we should never stop striving after making it one :-) -- Sebastian Schuberth -- 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
