From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: Output from "git blame A..B -- path" for the bottom commit is misleading Date: Fri, 9 May 2014 11:29:35 -0400 Message-ID: <20140509152935.GD18197@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <20140508212647.GA6992@sigill.intra.peff.net> <874n10ot2m.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <20140509001145.GA8734@sigill.intra.peff.net> <87zjiro856.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: Junio C Hamano , git@vger.kernel.org To: David Kastrup X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri May 09 17:31:54 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Wimm9-00038E-Tf for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Fri, 09 May 2014 17:31:54 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757066AbaEIP3n (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 May 2014 11:29:43 -0400 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([50.56.180.127]:48308 "HELO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1757044AbaEIP3h (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 May 2014 11:29:37 -0400 Received: (qmail 26721 invoked by uid 102); 9 May 2014 15:29:36 -0000 Received: from c-71-63-4-13.hsd1.va.comcast.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (71.63.4.13) (smtp-auth username relayok, mechanism cram-md5) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with ESMTPA; Fri, 09 May 2014 10:29:36 -0500 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Fri, 09 May 2014 11:29:35 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87zjiro856.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Fri, May 09, 2014 at 07:04:05AM +0200, David Kastrup wrote: > Arguably if the user explicitly limited the range, he knows what he's > looking at. Admittedly, I don't know offhand which options _will_ > produce boundary commit indications: there may be some without explicit > range limitation, and we might also be talking about limiting through > shallow repos (git blame on a shallow repo is probably a bad idea in the > first place, but anyway). Yes, I was thinking mostly of "X..Y" types of ranges, which are probably the most common. I hadn't considered shallow repositories, and you can also hit the root commit as a boundary if you do not specify --root. I guess the question still in my mind is: what use does the identity of the boundary commit have? That is, whether you know ahead of time where the boundary is or not, is there ever a case where knowing its author and/or commit sha1 is a useful piece of information, as opposed to knowing that we hit a boundary at all? I could not think of one, but I may simply lack imagination. -Peff