From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.7 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_PASS, SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 01CA11F531 for ; Fri, 7 Aug 2020 17:52:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728510AbgHGRwE (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 Aug 2020 13:52:04 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:48346 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728500AbgHGRwE (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 Aug 2020 13:52:04 -0400 Received: from mail-lj1-x242.google.com (mail-lj1-x242.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::242]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 220A4C061756 for ; Fri, 7 Aug 2020 10:52:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-lj1-x242.google.com with SMTP id z14so3118463ljm.1 for ; Fri, 07 Aug 2020 10:52:04 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id :user-agent:mime-version; bh=tID+ivYqYL3jG61lLMfykk4bd13lNX3Sl8Tow0MOz2M=; b=IVv4vrB7HL4Zug6+i/POffCtcKUb+/zQq+QLvN0A+J5KDDnVWz5rX4JWX2jgz5ppSQ /HycrePgdMXxQMZ3b69YF5mqwswCGARx/JNeJJbdfsjM2ixBCSRT00JsnsubEUgUqUY3 kG/G67oWpQSGEBkP6xWDjdxMKhPA9b3Ogbsm7Kj8KMYe4v/DMBNeIjSP73Os5berpNm1 vmyyemXlep040eUwwNUmGD4zZx82zs1hNdsaXiNx/4cUP0g2xhNuRfj/nX9tXpCv2vDw YZE0quyzgEW/gZmk9rvepTyxNA6qrLgJ7HcxTZDL9szjfmuX9b28ZsK8hvG8i1KtriCs H0aQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to :message-id:user-agent:mime-version; bh=tID+ivYqYL3jG61lLMfykk4bd13lNX3Sl8Tow0MOz2M=; b=RuEaMiKWZVBYoVFlnQLoxvX8RHIWqvyPAGg3ZH4nvYyF6tl8U9D6d6zE1ifUrn5fdR c38SjOGWRaP7Qp8Rd7y6RANlWkUFGz0cLJzwpHv5YH6WS0YMmo5VXlUpGHV31L/c/PMS CL53WV+tOm7qWky9XMFQqa+fodiV/X+YWLF+olc1Tttipby3YlLSSqxTmM4dMlQCNHEA FC+h5OsurrofM2aVMiiotIacu2XSYsqJxsY68Rb/bX1mza8W85Kb3KSG0aO3h22YlpiE uxQF3B2seDaS0w2dh67hWcX0JgtNpNJDLox0N9rP17rVOMUumHuXQecq6kU5fsGoo+Hw S6qg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531cnCRmqaQRnK31Akw5MIZj82sNu8BLKYcAYqPLPMnaRHioFr1S 2fFh15xUwyhj+HNz4WYIJLU= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzDNYXvPrSWFUoZhEp5gZ4iMSikFbFFMPrU7FGXCwjmPKxmKwpgcpTJsGvjZnEzwZOZpzGJtw== X-Received: by 2002:a2e:9a03:: with SMTP id o3mr7003485lji.48.1596822722524; Fri, 07 Aug 2020 10:52:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from osv.localdomain ([89.175.180.246]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id r11sm4081122lji.104.2020.08.07.10.52.01 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 07 Aug 2020 10:52:01 -0700 (PDT) From: Sergey Organov To: Junio C Hamano Cc: Jeff King , git@vger.kernel.org, Chris Torek Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/7] making log --first-parent imply -m References: <20200803180824.GA2711830@coredump.intra.peff.net> <874kpi47xj.fsf@osv.gnss.ru> <20200804200018.GB2014743@coredump.intra.peff.net> <877due1688.fsf@osv.gnss.ru> <20200804212201.GA2020725@coredump.intra.peff.net> <878seuxdz8.fsf@osv.gnss.ru> <20200804221440.GC2022650@coredump.intra.peff.net> <20200807082643.GA34012@coredump.intra.peff.net> Date: Fri, 07 Aug 2020 20:52:00 +0300 In-Reply-To: (Junio C. Hamano's message of "Fri, 07 Aug 2020 10:43:08 -0700") Message-ID: <87364ymji7.fsf@osv.gnss.ru> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Junio C Hamano writes: > Jeff King writes: > >> Agreed. My only question is whether the possibility of later having >> those other options might influence how we name the two options we add >> now. I think it's clear to all of us in this thread how those two easy >> options should behave, but if the intent is to eventually allow these to >> be mutually exclusive: >> >> - no diff >> - combined >> - dense combined >> - individual diff against each parent >> >> but orthogonal to the selection of the parent-set (none, all, or >> selected ones) then e.g. "all" makes less sense for "individual diff >> against each parent". I don't have a good succinct name suggestion, >> though. >> >> TBH, I would be happy enough with any of the suggestions in the thread, >> so I am really just finishing the thought here, and not trying to derail >> progress. :) > > I agree in principle that the above is a good framework to think > about the issue around "what to do with diff when showing a merge > commit", but I suspect that overly spending our effort to cover the > possibilities become mostly useless mental exercise, mostly because > (1) comparing with second parent is mostly useful only when the > merge was done in the wrong direction (i.e. an attempt by a leaf > contributor to "catch up to the trunc"), (2) octopus merges are rare > curiosity and discouraged due to bisect efficiency anyway, and (3) > even when looking at an octopus merge, omitting some and using only > a few selected parents to view with --cc/-c has dubious usefulness, > as the postimage has to show contributions from all the parents > plus "evil" adjustment anyway (iow, the primary effect of omitting > parents while viewing --cc/-c is to make it fuzzy which part of > apparently "evil" adjustment is what the merge did vs what the > hidden parents did). These are all examples that show not all the > combinations are useful. > > So... So, does --diff-merges=(off,none|comb|dense,dense-comb,comb-dense|sep,split) make sense as covering all the current features? I've put variations that came to my mind. Probably we'd better just select one for each case. Thanks, -- Sergey