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.

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

feat: document and change output for --git-repos #283

Merged
merged 7 commits into from Sep 14, 2023
Merged

Conversation

PThorpe92
Copy link
Member

image
I think this is much clearer, in reference to #281

with no-status
image

Copy link
Member

@cafkafk cafkafk left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Maybe this should be under a --git-repos entry. We should probably also explain the difference between --git-repos and --git-repos-no-status.

Refs: #62, ogham/exa#797

@PThorpe92
Copy link
Member Author

Maybe this should be under a --git-repos entry. We should probably also explain the difference between --git-repos and --git-repos-no-status.

Ok because my other PR changes that same area of documentation, I'll wait till that is merged and redo this one just to avoid a conflict

@PThorpe92 PThorpe92 added documentation Improvements or additions to documentation not ready for PRs that aren't finished labels Sep 12, 2023
@cafkafk
Copy link
Member

cafkafk commented Sep 12, 2023

Maybe this should be under a --git-repos entry. We should probably also explain the difference between --git-repos and --git-repos-no-status.

Ok because my other PR changes that same area of documentation, I'll wait till that is merged and redo this one just to avoid a conflict

Sorry, I didn't see that >_<

@cafkafk
Copy link
Member

cafkafk commented Sep 12, 2023

#272 is merged now

gierens
gierens previously approved these changes Sep 12, 2023
@PThorpe92 PThorpe92 added ready and removed not ready for PRs that aren't finished documentation Improvements or additions to documentation needs feedback features › git labels Sep 12, 2023
@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Sep 14, 2023

Given the existence of EXA_COLORS and the discussion of themeing with config files, would it be better not to include potentially wrong information about the symbol colors in the documentation? (And can the colors of these symbols be changed? Answer should be yes.)

cafkafk
cafkafk previously approved these changes Sep 14, 2023
Copy link
Member

@cafkafk cafkafk left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM, and now I actually understand the symbols, thanks!

@PThorpe92
Copy link
Member Author

PThorpe92 commented Sep 14, 2023

The reason I added the colors to the man page was because it will display a - for a git directory if unknown status, however it will also use the same - for a non-git directory. This is indeed one of the options I would like to be able to theme in the future, so the question is... do we want another symbol for unknown status instead of relying on a color?

either way I suppose, it would be best to remove the color from the man page 👍 fixing now

@PThorpe92 PThorpe92 merged commit 58b5472 into main Sep 14, 2023
15 checks passed
@cafkafk cafkafk deleted the p-git_repos branch September 14, 2023 15:44
@cafkafk
Copy link
Member

cafkafk commented Sep 14, 2023

🎉

@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Sep 14, 2023

This uses

            f::SubdirGitRepoStatus::GitClean => style.fg(Color::Green).paint("| "),
            f::SubdirGitRepoStatus::GitDirty => style.bold().fg(Color::Red).paint("+ "),
            f::SubdirGitRepoStatus::GitUnknown => style.fg(Color::Green).bold().paint("~ "),

Might I suggest using something like colours.new() for | and ~ and colours.modified() for +? With or without bold(), but that should made be consistent.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
Status: ✅ Done
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants