Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

git-ls-tree, git-rev-list, git-rev-parse: add pages #3644

Merged
merged 11 commits into from
Dec 17, 2019
Merged

git-ls-tree, git-rev-list, git-rev-parse: add pages #3644

Changes from 1 commit
Commits
Show all changes
11 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
e437c4f
git-ls-tree: add page
BeLi4L Dec 5, 2019
6d99b18
git-rev-list: add page
BeLi4L Dec 5, 2019
fa7e8f3
git-rev-parse: add page
BeLi4L Dec 5, 2019
3503534
git-ls-tree: use 1 option per example
BeLi4L Dec 5, 2019
a2c3e61
git-ls-tree: improve example
BeLi4L Dec 5, 2019
5ca4a8b
git-ls-tree: improve wording
BeLi4L Dec 6, 2019
3923a26
git-rev-parse: add basic example
BeLi4L Dec 6, 2019
4c51e2c
git-rev-list: improve wording
BeLi4L Dec 6, 2019
3dc463b
git-rev-list: prevent misunderstanding
BeLi4L Dec 6, 2019
98a60c0
git-rev-parse: rephrase description
BeLi4L Dec 7, 2019
d3cccff
git-ls-tree: improve example
BeLi4L Dec 10, 2019
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
10 changes: 7 additions & 3 deletions pages/common/git-ls-tree.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -5,8 +5,12 @@

- List the contents of the tree on a branch:

`git ls-tree {{master}}`
`git ls-tree {{branch_name}}`

- List the contents of the tree on a commit, recurse into subtrees, and show only filenames:
- List the contents of the tree on a commit and recurse into subtrees:
BeLi4L marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved Hide resolved

`git ls-tree -r --name-only {{c39ab84d}}`
`git ls-tree -r {{commit_hash}}`

- List the contents of the tree on a commit and show only filenames:

`git ls-tree --name-only {{HEAD~3}}`
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I would change HEAD~3 to HEAD~N and note it shows the situation N commits ago or something like that.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

👍

a2c3e61

Copy link
Contributor

@zlatanvasovic zlatanvasovic Dec 5, 2019 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I would rather not put it as {{{HEAD}}~{{N}}. Maybe just HEAD~{{N}}?

/cc @waldyrious what would be the proper syntax here?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@BeLi4L maybe wait for a consensus to emerge in these discussions before applying the changes, otherwise you may need to do a lot of back and forth 😅

As for the syntax, I'm afraid we're making things too complex. The syntax for relative references is not something that this page is responsible for introducing. My suggestion is to simply include the 3 in the command description, and use {{HEAD~3}} as the token, rather than generalize with N. WDYT?

Copy link
Member

@waldyrious waldyrious Dec 6, 2019 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Or maybe we could bypass this conundrum altogether by using another type of reference, like a tag (e.g. {{v1.2.3}}).

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@zdroid I'd like to know what you dislike about using a tag, in light of my comments above.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Isn't the term commit-ish used in the man pages?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Any news on this? I can use commit-ish if you're all OK with that

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The current version is fine with me. Maybe @sbrl wants to use "commit-ish" instead, both work for me.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I don't mind. Either work for me.