Skip to contentSkip to conversation

builtin-push: New long option --verbose

PATCH In review Jari Aalto 4 participants 8 messages Jun 15, 2016 Documentation

lore
Share & tools
lore

Jari Aalto

author
#0 lore raw

PATCH 1/1 builtin-push: New long option --verbose

Implemented and documented new option.

---
 Documentation/git-push.txt |    4 ++--
 builtin-push.c             |    5 +++--
 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
Documentation/git-push.txt +2 -2
index f8cc2b5..fb9dc7f 100644
@@ -8,7 +8,7 @@ git-push - Update remote refs along with associated objects
 
 SYNOPSIS
 --------
-'git-push' [--all] [--tags] [--receive-pack=<git-receive-pack>] [--repo=all] [-f | --force] [-v] [<repository> <refspec>...]
+'git-push' [--all] [--tags] [--receive-pack=<git-receive-pack>] [--repo=all] [-f | --force] [-v | --verbose] [<repository> <refspec>...]
 
 DESCRIPTION
 -----------
@@ -91,7 +91,7 @@ the remote repository.
 	transfer spends extra cycles to minimize the number of
 	objects to be sent and meant to be used on slower connection.
 
--v::
+-v, \--verbose::
 	Run verbosely.
 
 include::urls.txt[]
builtin-push.c +3 -2
index cb78401..613f6c2 100644
@@ -8,7 +8,7 @@
 
 #define MAX_URI (16)
 
-static const char push_usage[] = "git-push [--all] [--tags] [--receive-pack=<git-receive-pack>] [--repo=all] [-f | --force] [-v] [<repository> <refspec>...]";
+static const char push_usage[] = "git-push [--all] [--tags] [--receive-pack=<git-receive-pack>] [--repo=all] [-f | --force] [-v | --verbose] [<repository> <refspec>...]";
 
 static int all, tags, force, thin = 1, verbose;
 static const char *receivepack;
@@ -372,7 +372,8 @@ int cmd_push(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix)
 			i++;
 			break;
 		}
-		if (!strcmp(arg, "-v")) {
+		if (!strcmp(arg, "-v") ||
+                    !strcmp(arg, "--verbose")) {
 			verbose=1;
 			continue;
 		}
Signature · 1 line
1.5.3.rc5
#2 lore raw
Quoted 1 line · Junio C Hamano

Why?

One reason is that I often don't know if the program I want to run (git or something sles) uses -v as the "verbose" flag, or if it's the "version" flag or something else. But if there is a --verbose flag, I can be sure what it is, so I often try that first if I'm unsure. If that faild, I'll probably look in the man page.

Signature · 1 line
David Kågedal
author
#3 lore raw
In reply to Junio C Hamano
Quoted 1 line · Junio C Hamano

Why?

It complements the command set. -v was the only lonely that did not have long option choice.

Overall, the option handling in every command could use aboot to provide both short and long options. Now various commands have short ones, but no long ones, or vice versa. It's like sherwood there.

Let's start unifying.
Jari

#4 lore raw

Hi,

Quoted 6 lines · Jari Aalto
Quoted 1 line · Junio C Hamano

Why?

It complements the command set. -v was the only lonely that did not have long option choice.

Of course, the _proper_ solution would be to introduce a complete option parser component a la getopt. For me, it is not _half_ as annoying that some short/long options are missing than being unable to abbreviate the short options into something like "-nls".

Ciao,
Dscho

author
#6 lore raw
Quoted 7 lines · Johannes Schindelin

Hi,

Quoted 1 line · Jari Aalto

Implemented and documented new option.

It is not "new". It is just a long form for the already existing "-v".

Perception is in the eye. "new long option"

                               ===========

Jari

#7 lore raw

Hi,

[please, if you reply to my message, do not kill me from the address list]

Quoted 10 lines · Jari Aalto
Quoted 5 lines · Johannes Schindelin
Quoted 1 line · Jari Aalto

Implemented and documented new option.

It is not "new". It is just a long form for the already existing "-v".

Perception is in the eye. "new long option"

                               ===========

More appropriate: "Add long option --verbose".

Even as a long option, it is not new. There have been plenty "--verbose"s in git before.

It might appear to you as a minor nit, but reading commit logs it is pretty disruptive to read about the "new" option and wondering "why the heck was it not there before? Ah, it was. The committer just added the long version of the option".

Ciao,
Dscho