From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Olaf Hering <olaf@aepfle.de>, John Keeping <john@keeping.me.uk>,
Git Mailing List <git@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: git log fails to show all changes for a file
Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2015 11:17:50 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <xmqqtwt5wai9.fsf@gitster.dls.corp.google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+55aFw=PJtc7jXLUx+tJhAeVO3vpQjsd+oYW+OwCU20_Qft-w@mail.gmail.com> (Linus Torvalds's message of "Wed, 15 Jul 2015 11:11:32 -0700")
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> writes:
> On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 10:58 AM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
>>
>> * When '-p' is given, we show only diff with first-parent by
>> default, regardless of the traversal (i.e. --first-parent option
>> currently controls both traversal and patch display, but in the
>> new world order, it reverts back to purely a traversal option).
>
> So this is a suggested change to "-p -m" behavior?
Not really. This is a suggested behaviour for "git log -p"; I
wasn't very enthused by the idea to turn --cc when user said -p
without telling them what we are doing. In other words, if the
users want combined, they should say --cc (and they will get a
single-parent patch for non-merges with --cc) so there is no reason
not to do this, as long as we fix --cc so that "git log --cc"
implies "git log --cc -p".
> Yes, that sounds sane. The current "-p -m" behavior is not useful at all.
>
> So if I understand rightly, we'd have:
>
> "-p" would be what is currently "-p --cc"
Not really.
> "-p -m" would be what is currently "-p --first-parent"
Not really. I was dropping "-m" entirely with "we could do -p -m2
but I do not think we should bother".
> "-p --no-show-merge-diffs" would be what is currently "-p"
Yes.
> and the rationale would be that
>
> (a) the current "-p" is hiding things, and while you can add "--cc",
> that requires that you really understand what is being hidden, which
> is a bad default (the complaint that started this discussion)
>
> (b) the current "-p -m" is useless crazy stuff, and you'd rather use
> it for something that you actually find very common and useful
>
> If so, I agree entirely.
>
> Linus
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-07-15 18:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-07-14 7:30 git log fails to show all changes for a file Olaf Hering
2015-07-14 7:45 ` John Keeping
2015-07-14 7:59 ` Olaf Hering
2015-07-14 17:54 ` Andreas Schwab
2015-07-14 19:16 ` Linus Torvalds
2015-07-15 16:29 ` Junio C Hamano
2015-07-15 17:13 ` Linus Torvalds
2015-07-15 17:58 ` Junio C Hamano
2015-07-15 18:11 ` Linus Torvalds
2015-07-15 18:17 ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
2015-07-15 18:57 ` Jeff King
2015-07-15 19:22 ` Junio C Hamano
2015-07-15 19:17 ` Linus Torvalds
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=xmqqtwt5wai9.fsf@gitster.dls.corp.google.com \
--to=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=john@keeping.me.uk \
--cc=olaf@aepfle.de \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://80x24.org/mirrors/git.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).