Martin Stjernholm, Roxen IS @ Pike developers forum wrote:
>> And a small script called git-diffl in your path:
>/.../
>Thanks for the effort, but that was a tad too kludgy for me (doesn't
>work with multiple dirs, for instance). I hope they'll add an option
>to git-diff eventually.
Well, Linus himself thinks it's a five line patch or something.
So if you care to add it, it'll probably be accepted in mainstream (I
can assist in getting it in the main distribution).
>Would be best if git-diff didn't expand when diffing (considering that
>the expansion is done after checkout I reckon that's what one would
>get anyway, unless they actively do the extra work to expand $Id$
>before diffing too).
Probably, yes.
>The usefulness is in bug reports etc, so working expansions are most
>important in dists. Can occasionally be useful in bug reports between
>developers as well I guess, but of course anyone is free to disable
>expansion in one's own trees. Still think it should be the default,
>though.
You mean it's most relevant in binaries when people reveal the
revision of a tool or module using a version command?
This would not include the practice of the $Id$ in the comment header
of a file, or would it?
--
Sincerely,
Stephen R. van den Berg.
"There are three types of people in this world: those who make things happen,
those who watch things happen and those who wonder what happened."
