From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: RFH: unexpected reflog behavior with --since= Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 02:59:41 -0500 Message-ID: <20111110075941.GA28148@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <4EB9C7D1.30201@nextest.com> <20111109220128.GA31535@sigill.intra.peff.net> <4EBB81EA.6060303@nextest.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: "git@vger.kernel.org" To: Eric Raible X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Nov 10 08:59:50 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1ROPY6-0007ND-8T for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Thu, 10 Nov 2011 08:59:50 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755110Ab1KJH7p (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Nov 2011 02:59:45 -0500 Received: from 99-108-226-0.lightspeed.iplsin.sbcglobal.net ([99.108.226.0]:38937 "EHLO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754000Ab1KJH7o (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Nov 2011 02:59:44 -0500 Received: (qmail 22714 invoked by uid 107); 10 Nov 2011 07:59:46 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) (smtp-auth username relayok, mechanism cram-md5) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with ESMTPA; Thu, 10 Nov 2011 02:59:46 -0500 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Thu, 10 Nov 2011 02:59:41 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4EBB81EA.6060303@nextest.com> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Wed, Nov 09, 2011 at 11:48:58PM -0800, Eric Raible wrote: > > But it may also be a misfeature, because it's not clear what you're > > actually trying to limit by. We have commit timestamps, of course, but > > when we are walking reflogs, we also have reflog timestamps. Did you > > actually want to say "show me all commits in the reflog, in reverse > > reflog order, omitting commits that happened before time t"? Or did you > > really mean "show me the reflog entries that happened before time t, > > regardless of their commit timestamp"? > > I meant "show me the reflog entries that happened *since* time t, > regardless of their commit timestamp. Err, yeah, sorry. Somehow in the middle of writing the email I got turned backwards about which direction we were interested in. But I think you get the point. > Since -g is asking specifying for the reflog, and since the reflog has > its own timestamps, I would expect that those timestamps be used. Then I think my one-liner patch should do what you want. And now it's not just anecdotal evidence that I think it's the right behavior. There are two of us; we're _data_. -Peff