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
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