From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fixes git-cherry algorithmic flaws Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2006 10:47:29 -0700 Message-ID: <7vodt59mxa.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> References: <20060924000051.GI20017@pasky.or.cz> <7virjem3tp.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <20060924111737.GL20017@pasky.or.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Ilpo =?iso-8859-1?Q?J=E4rvinen?= , git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sun Sep 24 19:47:44 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GRY4s-0001FS-IE for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Sun, 24 Sep 2006 19:47:42 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751344AbWIXRrc (ORCPT ); Sun, 24 Sep 2006 13:47:32 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751339AbWIXRrc (ORCPT ); Sun, 24 Sep 2006 13:47:32 -0400 Received: from fed1rmmtao12.cox.net ([68.230.241.27]:12981 "EHLO fed1rmmtao12.cox.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751334AbWIXRra (ORCPT ); Sun, 24 Sep 2006 13:47:30 -0400 Received: from fed1rmimpo02.cox.net ([70.169.32.72]) by fed1rmmtao12.cox.net (InterMail vM.6.01.06.01 201-2131-130-101-20060113) with ESMTP id <20060924174730.MEUO26416.fed1rmmtao12.cox.net@fed1rmimpo02.cox.net>; Sun, 24 Sep 2006 13:47:30 -0400 Received: from assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net ([68.5.247.80]) by fed1rmimpo02.cox.net with bizsmtp id SHnX1V00j1kojtg0000000 Sun, 24 Sep 2006 13:47:32 -0400 To: Petr Baudis In-Reply-To: <20060924111737.GL20017@pasky.or.cz> (Petr Baudis's message of "Sun, 24 Sep 2006 13:17:38 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Petr Baudis writes: > Hmm, well, what's curious is that the documentation says > > Every commit with a changeset that doesn't exist in the other branch > has its id (sha1) reported, prefixed by a symbol. Those existing only > in the branch are prefixed with a minus (-) sign, and those > that only exist in the branch are prefixed with a plus (+) > symbol. > > which is in contradiction of Ilpo's description of the old algorithm > (and also your description of it). It would seem he just wants to fix it > according to the documented behaviour. > > I guess the documentation is what's broken then? Ah I did not realize that, but yes the documentation is incorrect. I wonder if we can kill it by introducing a new rev notation and using regular rev-list family of commands instead. What we want here is a way to say "give me commits that are in B but not in A, but before returning a commit see if there is an equivalent change in the set of commits that are in A but not in B, and filter it out". Time for "rev-list A....B"? ;-)