* Still using "git whatchanged"
@ 2025-09-02 6:18 jorg
2025-09-02 16:29 ` Junio C Hamano
0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: jorg @ 2025-09-02 6:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: git
Hi,
apart from what's stated in the subject, I think it's not logical to use "--raw" when I want to see what has changed.
"git log" shows me the log. What's the raw part about wanting to see what's changed?
If "git whatchanged" will be abandoned, please at least let me type "git log --whatchanged" in the future.
Thanks.
Regards,
J
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: Still using "git whatchanged"
2025-09-02 6:18 Still using "git whatchanged" jorg
@ 2025-09-02 16:29 ` Junio C Hamano
2025-09-02 16:38 ` jorg
0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Junio C Hamano @ 2025-09-02 16:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: jorg; +Cc: git
jorg@ml1•net writes:
> apart from what's stated in the subject, I think it's not logical
> to use "--raw" when I want to see what has changed.
>
> "git log" shows me the log. What's the raw part about wanting to
> see what's changed?
But that is what "git whatchanged" gives, so when one is so attached to
what "git whatchanged" does, "--raw" is what we cite as "compatible"
option.
If you want to really see what hash changed, there are other and
better options, depending on what level of details you would want to
go into, ranging from --name-only to -p. My personal preference is
"log --compact-summary" but I do not want to force my preference on
those who want to stick to the output from "whatchanged".
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: Still using "git whatchanged"
2025-09-02 16:29 ` Junio C Hamano
@ 2025-09-02 16:38 ` jorg
2025-09-02 20:33 ` Junio C Hamano
0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: jorg @ 2025-09-02 16:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Junio C Hamano; +Cc: git
On Tue, Sep 2, 2025, at 19:29, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> jorg@ml1•net writes:
>
>> apart from what's stated in the subject, I think it's not logical
>> to use "--raw" when I want to see what has changed.
>>
>> "git log" shows me the log. What's the raw part about wanting to
>> see what's changed?
>
> But that is what "git whatchanged" gives, so when one is so attached to
> what "git whatchanged" does, "--raw" is what we cite as "compatible"
> option.
My point was merely that IMO "raw" is not the best name for that option. When I specify "--raw" on the command line, I usually expect the program to output similar data than without that option, but of a less refined state or kind.
In this case "--raw" means "do the same thing as without --raw (i.e. git log), but _in_addition_ tell me which files changed". That's why I think it's not the best name for that option.
I'm not sure if this is the right forum for this discussion, but if I were asked, I'd vote to rename "--raw" to "--whatchanged" and be... almost happy with removing "git whatchanged" (insert tear-smiley here).
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: Still using "git whatchanged"
2025-09-02 16:38 ` jorg
@ 2025-09-02 20:33 ` Junio C Hamano
2025-09-03 6:11 ` jorg
0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Junio C Hamano @ 2025-09-02 20:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: jorg; +Cc: git
jorg@ml1•net writes:
> On Tue, Sep 2, 2025, at 19:29, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> jorg@ml1•net writes:
>>
>>> apart from what's stated in the subject, I think it's not logical
>>> to use "--raw" when I want to see what has changed.
>>>
>>> "git log" shows me the log. What's the raw part about wanting to
>>> see what's changed?
>>
>> But that is what "git whatchanged" gives, so when one is so attached to
>> what "git whatchanged" does, "--raw" is what we cite as "compatible"
>> option.
>
> My point was merely that IMO "raw" is not the best name for that
> option. When I specify "--raw" on the command line, I usually
> expect the program to output similar data than without that
> option, but of a less refined state or kind.
Sorry, but you are 20 years too late for *that* party. Once you
invent a time machine and go back 20 years, you can advocate for
different name(s) that may fit your personal preferences better
there.
But not here and not now.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: Still using "git whatchanged"
2025-09-02 20:33 ` Junio C Hamano
@ 2025-09-03 6:11 ` jorg
2025-09-03 7:08 ` Kristoffer Haugsbakk
0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: jorg @ 2025-09-03 6:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Junio C Hamano; +Cc: git
On Tue, Sep 2, 2025, at 23:33, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> jorg@ml1•net writes:
>>
>> My point was merely that IMO "raw" is not the best name for that
>> option. When I specify "--raw" on the command line, I usually
>> expect the program to output similar data than without that
>> option, but of a less refined state or kind.
>
> Sorry, but you are 20 years too late for *that* party. Once you
> invent a time machine and go back 20 years, you can advocate for
> different name(s) that may fit your personal preferences better
> there.
>
> But not here and not now.
See below:
>> I'm not sure if this is the right forum for this discussion, but if I were asked...
Given the circumstances, I vote for keeping "git whatchanged".
Regards,
J
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: Still using "git whatchanged"
2025-09-03 6:11 ` jorg
@ 2025-09-03 7:08 ` Kristoffer Haugsbakk
2025-09-03 7:15 ` jorg
0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Kristoffer Haugsbakk @ 2025-09-03 7:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: jorg, Junio C Hamano; +Cc: git
On Wed, Sep 3, 2025, at 08:11, jorg@ml1•net wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 2, 2025, at 23:33, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>>[snip]
>> But not here and not now.
>
> See below:
>
>>> I'm not sure if this is the right forum for this discussion, but if
>>> I were asked...
>
>
> Given the circumstances, I vote for keeping "git whatchanged".
You can see the discussion around the whatchanged deprecation as well as
other things in this document:
https://git-scm.com/docs/BreakingChanges.html
> Given the circumstances,
What circumstances?
--
Kristoffer Haugsbakk
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: Still using "git whatchanged"
2025-09-03 7:08 ` Kristoffer Haugsbakk
@ 2025-09-03 7:15 ` jorg
0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: jorg @ 2025-09-03 7:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Kristoffer Haugsbakk, Junio C Hamano; +Cc: git
On Wed, Sep 3, 2025, at 10:08, Kristoffer Haugsbakk wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 3, 2025, at 08:11, jorg@ml1•net wrote:
>>
>> Given the circumstances, I vote for keeping "git whatchanged".
>
> You can see the discussion around the whatchanged deprecation as well as
> other things in this document:
>
> https://git-scm.com/docs/BreakingChanges.html
I fail to find the discussion around the whatchanged deprecation in that document. There is mention of the deprecation, but that's all.
(But I can certainly find discussion around it if I want to, no need to send more links.)
>> Given the circumstances,
>
> What circumstances?
The circumstances that other changes to command line parameters (which might mitigate the loss of "whatchanged") are not up for debate.
Regards,
J
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* still using 'git whatchanged'
@ 2025-10-15 5:42 Greg Couch
2025-10-15 7:22 ` Kristoffer Haugsbakk
0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Greg Couch @ 2025-10-15 5:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: git
Please fix the 'git whatchanged' deprecation message to suggest using
'git log' instead of suggesting the painful --i-still-use-this and
email. The current behavior is unappreciated.
-- Greg
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: still using 'git whatchanged'
2025-10-15 5:42 still using 'git whatchanged' Greg Couch
@ 2025-10-15 7:22 ` Kristoffer Haugsbakk
0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Kristoffer Haugsbakk @ 2025-10-15 7:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Greg Couch, git
On Wed, Oct 15, 2025, at 07:42, Greg Couch wrote:
> Please fix the 'git whatchanged' deprecation message to suggest using
> 'git log' instead of suggesting the painful --i-still-use-this and
> email. The current behavior is unappreciated.
This is coming in 2.51.1 which looks like it will be released soon.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2025-10-15 7:22 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2025-09-02 6:18 Still using "git whatchanged" jorg
2025-09-02 16:29 ` Junio C Hamano
2025-09-02 16:38 ` jorg
2025-09-02 20:33 ` Junio C Hamano
2025-09-03 6:11 ` jorg
2025-09-03 7:08 ` Kristoffer Haugsbakk
2025-09-03 7:15 ` jorg
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2025-10-15 5:42 still using 'git whatchanged' Greg Couch
2025-10-15 7:22 ` Kristoffer Haugsbakk
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox