IMO the log message is more important because it describes and justifies
what happened. Showing the diff is good as well.
That's not relevant to the issue at hand. Like it or not, VCSes other
than Git describe a revision by the diffs alone.
It's 100% relevant, and the fact that certain older VCSes can't do this
should have no bearing on whether we implement a satisfactory UI in VC
or not. That's the whole purpose of VC: make interacting with different
VS systems easier.
Easier, yes. But also present the results in a familiar enough form.
If users are accustomed to seeing a revision described by diffs, then
this is what they should by default see in VC, IMO.
Maybe the other VCSes don't have a simple command to do the same, but
they can either be called twice, or use special formatting. For
instance, Hg can use this command:
hg log -r <REV> -p
IMO, this is over-engineering. If the VCS developers don't see the
need to have a commands which shows meta-data together with the diffs,
we should not force that on that VCS.
They added the '-p' flag. So apparently they did see the need.
Then maybe the hg back-end should indeed call "log -r -p", if that's
what hg users are used to (I don't use hg). What I mean is that we
should show a revision like users are accustomed to see it with the
particular back-end; jumping through hoops to produce Git-like display
where users don't really expect it is IMO over-engineering.