From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Ping Yin" Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/4] git-submodule: New subcommand 'summary' (2) - show commit summary Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 10:16:23 +0800 Message-ID: <46dff0320803051816x5b957da0m6396d31cad8b4116@mail.gmail.com> References: <1204481710-29791-1-git-send-email-pkufranky@gmail.com> <1204481710-29791-2-git-send-email-pkufranky@gmail.com> <7vk5kgiv0v.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: git@vger.kernel.org To: "Junio C Hamano" X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Mar 06 03:17:06 2008 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 1JX5fM-0007h7-Py for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Thu, 06 Mar 2008 03:17:05 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752696AbYCFCQ0 (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Mar 2008 21:16:26 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753127AbYCFCQ0 (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Mar 2008 21:16:26 -0500 Received: from wx-out-0506.google.com ([66.249.82.226]:14802 "EHLO wx-out-0506.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752336AbYCFCQZ (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Mar 2008 21:16:25 -0500 Received: by wx-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id h31so2351029wxd.4 for ; Wed, 05 Mar 2008 18:16:24 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=criiGrY0bktkXLHmc+uKR51wLui9PU2GlG5f87zRR/o=; b=rnzdsKdU3b5SlerY/yuhcKWaYOkTFLhcTEhrxACvHIqT7BMzcp81OADHimndCQAt6TEjV5zYJVCjJVQMXo7AMvXAPjJYr7XEN957uWASeVv5c1I9HlKaePa0QenHdLHz0UWLN6f+UUqWzUIVQjbqPqslk8IStwV0ZOHFc3uWiEc= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=OFB2u7hD+fsweLDlq4jhtj9vAp5Aav72UZQCVTecATttyeQBCW8koeZaKzDNH2zRFFpkMHhmZ/10h9aiOEMh7j8yi9QV0Fp7Hx2DKBNVACciH031MmZE/wXd3dqjbkjNhbuMQNORCS7kn/HeeVTOE+q5gLmP1q3SoJNwgHXkjrc= Received: by 10.100.241.17 with SMTP id o17mr8599725anh.43.1204769784031; Wed, 05 Mar 2008 18:16:24 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.100.5.18 with HTTP; Wed, 5 Mar 2008 18:16:23 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <7vk5kgiv0v.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> Content-Disposition: inline Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Thu, Mar 6, 2008 at 7:57 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Ping Yin writes: > > > Example: commit summary for modified submodules sm1-sm5. > > --A-->B-->C (in src:354cd45) > > \ > > -->D-->E (in dst:3f751e5) > > The ordering of the commits in the above list is (1) unnatural and (2) > does not match what you would see with "log --left-right --topo-order > C...E". > > I do not think "it shows the path to move from C to E" justifies it. If > you are showing them as a linear list (which you cannot avoid if you are > doing a sequence of one-line description), you cannot represent such a > "path" anyway (think "merge"). If an appliance project rebinds kernel/ > path from a project based on linux-2.4 to linux-2.6 while upgrading, such > a "path" may not even exist. > Good point to show 'log --left-right --topo-order' is better > I think I've already said the above to your initial round. It is a bit > dissapointing to see none of the comments were addressed and makes me > wonder if I have wasted my time reviewing them again. Sorry i lost your comments. Maybe it's a long time ago, i will revisit them. > > It also is unnerving that newly added and deleted submodule results in the > full history display. It would be assuring to be able to see and verify > what the top commit is (or was in "deleted" case) while you are commiting, > but I do not see a reason to show more than that. > > I do not think "then set the limit to 1" is a valid answer to that > concern. Wanting to see a dozen top commits in each for a modified > submodule would be sensible (and 3/4 may implement such a limit) but even > then showing dozen top commits for new/deleted at the same time would be > just an added noise. Is it really necessary to show more than the top for > new/deleted case? > Actually, not make much sense to show many commits in delete or add case. I think showing 2 (the head and tail one) should make more sense since the head one would be "Initial add ..." in many cases which doesn't make much sense for the user. I will resend my patches after taking considering all of your suggestion today or tommorow. -- Ping Yin