From: Jon Seymour <jon.seymour@gmail.com>
To: Git Mailing List <git@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add support for --wrt-author, --author and --exclude-author switches to git-rev-list
Date: Wed, 8 Jun 2005 10:54:16 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2cfc403205060717543891334f@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2cfc403205060702594da21fb1@mail.gmail.com>
| not sure why, but my first attempt to post this to the list didn't
seem to make it
| I've also modified my response slightly to suggest an alternate name for the
| --exclude-author swtich which may partly address pasky's concerns. amended
| response marked with ***
On 6/7/05, Petr Baudis <pasky@ucw.cz> wrote:
>
> I'd prefer just --wrt-author and --exclude-author to take an argument on
> their own.
The reason I don't want to do this is that it doesn't really make
sense in the context of the change to specify one author for
--wrt-author and another for --exclude-author. In normal use --author
defaults to GIT_AUTHOR_EMAIL or the locally derived user@host.domain.
The intention is simply to override this default derivation.
*** That said, it might better if --exclude-author was called
something like --following-author --after-author or --stop-at-author,
since its meaning is to stop traversal rather than simply omit match
entries which is the meaning that a reasonable user might attach to
use of the word "exclude"
My preference is --following-author.
Thoughts anyone?
>
> (Note that I don't endorse this patch and the --wrt-author behaviour in
> particular seems strange. I don't have enough time to comment on it
> sensibly now, though. I'm just focusing on style here since I'd like to
> still be able to read git's source code few weeks from now on.)
The rationale for the change is as follows:
During parallel development, one is aware of ones own
changes...everyone else changes haven't happened yet as far as you are
concerned. Only when they appear in a future merge that incorporates
one's own changes do the other changes appear in your own workspace.
As far as you are concerned, these changes occurred after you made
your own - your changes were not dependent on those changes, only on
those that came before. So the linearisation reflects that perceived
ordering of changes.
--wrt-author helps to reconstruct the merge-history from the
perspective of each individual committer.
Let me know if this doesn't explain the rationale completely enough
for your understanding.
jon.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-06-08 0:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-06-07 9:15 [PATCH] Add support for --wrt-author, --author and --exclude-author switches to git-rev-list Jon Seymour
2005-06-07 9:30 ` Jon Seymour
2005-06-07 9:49 ` Petr Baudis
[not found] ` <2cfc403205060702594da21fb1@mail.gmail.com>
[not found] ` <2cfc403205060702596dee7341@mail.gmail.com>
2005-06-07 15:58 ` Jon Seymour
2005-06-08 0:54 ` Jon Seymour [this message]
2005-06-08 8:58 ` Petr Baudis
2005-06-08 9:31 ` Jon Seymour
2005-06-08 10:52 ` Jon Seymour
2005-06-08 11:14 ` Jon Seymour
2005-06-08 16:36 ` [WITHDRAW PATCH] " Jon Seymour
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
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=2cfc403205060717543891334f@mail.gmail.com \
--to=jon.seymour@gmail.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=jon@blackcubes.dyndns.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.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.