Also, it should be called --stop-before given it's behaviour.
--stop-at implies that it includes the given commit.

Petr Baudis wrote:

>Dear diary, on Fri, May 13, 2005 at 02:15:15AM CEST, I got a letter
>where Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net> told me that...
>  
>
>>Additional option, --stop-at=<commit>, is introduced.  The
>>git-rev-list output stops just before showing the named commit.
>>
>>This is based on Thoms Gleixner's patch but slightly reworked.
>>
>>Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
>>    
>>
>
>Won't apply for now - as I already said in the relevant thread, this
>makes no sense with the current git-rev-list output order, and even
>encourages using it in wrong way. It is ok when the merges are reported
>in a different way, but that's impossible without some repoid (I yet
>have to catch up with that thread :-).
>
>  
>


NOTICE: Please note that this email, and the contents thereof, 
are subject to the standard Peralex email disclaimer, which may 
be found at: http://www.peralex.com/disclaimer.html

If you cannot access the disclaimer through the URL attached 
 and you wish to receive a copy thereof please send 
 an email to email@peralex.com