From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] Add a 'source' decorator for commits Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2008 15:29:43 -0400 Message-ID: <20081028192942.GA752@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <20081028054539.GA23195@sigill.intra.peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: Git Mailing List , Junio C Hamano To: Linus Torvalds X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Oct 28 20:33:03 2008 connect(): Connection refused Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1KuuHN-0008M1-MZ for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Tue, 28 Oct 2008 20:31:02 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753427AbYJ1T3s (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Oct 2008 15:29:48 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753374AbYJ1T3r (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Oct 2008 15:29:47 -0400 Received: from peff.net ([208.65.91.99]:3070 "EHLO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753244AbYJ1T3r (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Oct 2008 15:29:47 -0400 Received: (qmail 23116 invoked by uid 111); 28 Oct 2008 19:29:45 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (216.239.45.19) (smtp-auth username relayok, mechanism cram-md5) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.32) with ESMTP; Tue, 28 Oct 2008 15:29:45 -0400 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Tue, 28 Oct 2008 15:29:43 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 08:17:02AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > - Does it make sense to have this _in addition_ to --decorate (since > > for any commit with a --decorate field, it would likely be the same > > as --source)? Should it be a different type of decorate instead, > > like --decorate=source or --decorate=branch? > > I think they are different. People who want --source generally have other > issues than people who want --decorate, and the two do actually work > together. Sleeping on this and thinking about it some more, I think you are right here, and all of the other complaints I had just go away. I was thinking of it as "decorate commits with the likely branches they were made on." But that's not what this is at all (though it happens to come up with similar answers!). It's really about "show which ref, of the refs which were requested to be shown, we started at to reach this commit." Which is perhaps more limited, but obvoiusly is much faster to compute. And then the output of "git log --source HEAD" makes perfect sense, and it makes sense not to worry about finding the "closest" ref. It is really about annotating the traversal that you asked for. So now my only complaint is the lack of documentation and tests. ;) -Peff