Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] Documentation: make git-sh-setup docs less scary

From: Thomas Rast <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2011 21:27:44 +0100

Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <[email-masked]> writes:
> On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 12:09, Thomas Rast <[email-masked]> wrote:
>> At least one IRC user was scared away by the introductory "This is not
>> a command the end user would want to run.  Ever." to the point of not
>> reading on.
>
> Arguably that's the point isn't it? To not have people who aren't
> maintaining Git itself waste time on reading it.

Junio C Hamano writes:
> You would need to say what that IRC user needed to find out. Depending on
> that, letting the user know that there is no point reading on early and
> not waste his or her time may be a good thing. That was what the paragraph
> was designed for. IOW, it is not to "scare" away, but to allow the users
> to decide if they are intended audiences.

Well, the original question was [*]

  <ribasushi> how do I write a batch-test (goes in a script, exit value matters only) to test if the current workdir is clean?
  <ribasushi> i.e. nothing staged/unstaged to commit
  <shruggar> last I looked, there was no "all in one" method :/
  <shruggar> git diff -q && git diff —cached -q, perhaps
  <charon> ribasushi: . "$(git --exec-path)/git-sh-setup" ; require_clean_worktree
  <shruggar> but I think that's ignoring something
  <ribasushi> lack of output of `git status -s` seems to be what I want
  <ribasushi> hmmm
  <ribasushi> charon: git-gh-setup's manpage does not seem to list what you gave me
  <ribasushi> and the manpage says that I should not be touching it...

Leaving aside my worktree vs. work_tree mistake, he concluded that he
should not be using it even though he is a script writer.

Regardless, I don't really care enough about this one; let's just do the
first patch (v2 upcoming) so that we have documentation to point people
at.

[*] http://colabti.org/irclogger/irclogger_log/git?date=2011-12-20#l1284

-- 
Thomas Rast
trast@{inf,student}.ethz.ch