From: Kevin Bracey <kevin@bracey.fi>
To: John Keeping <john@keeping.me.uk>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>,
Jeff King <peff@peff.net>, Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>,
Michael J Gruber <git@drmicha.warpmail.net>
Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH 0/2] merge-base: add --merge-child option
Date: Sun, 12 May 2013 20:29:38 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <518FD182.5020606@bracey.fi> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130512165829.GM2299@serenity.lan>
On 12/05/2013 19:58, John Keeping wrote:
>
> With the patch below, the --ancestry-path version drops to under 2
> seconds.
>
> I'm not sure if this is a good idea though. It helps me say "I know
> nothing that isn't on the ancestry path can be patch-identical, so don't
> bother checking if it is" but it regresses users who want the full
> cherry-pick check while only limiting the output.
Hmm. Should an excluded commit be a valid comparator? Is it
sensible/correct to show a left commit as "=" to a right commit that has
been excluded by the revision specifiers? Doesn't sound right to me.
I'm not convinced that there's a valid use-case that you're regressing
here. If --ancestry-path is being misused (the user's assertion that
non-ancestry doesn't matter is wrong) the "error" of not noting culled
patch-identical commits is nothing compared to the fact we're already
totally omitting the non-identical ones.
Kevin
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-05-12 17:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-05-11 12:23 [RFC/PATCH 0/2] merge-base: add --merge-child option John Keeping
2013-05-11 12:23 ` [RFC/PATCH 1/2] commit: add commit_list_contains function John Keeping
2013-05-11 12:23 ` [RFC/PATCH 2/2] merge-base: add --merge-child option John Keeping
2013-05-11 17:54 ` [RFC/PATCH 0/2] " Junio C Hamano
2013-05-11 18:48 ` John Keeping
2013-05-12 15:44 ` Kevin Bracey
2013-05-12 16:28 ` John Keeping
2013-05-12 16:33 ` John Keeping
2013-05-12 17:14 ` Kevin Bracey
2013-05-12 22:22 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-05-13 14:26 ` Kevin Bracey
2013-05-13 14:45 ` Michael J Gruber
2013-05-19 12:40 ` log --cherry and merges (was [RFC/PATCH 0/2] merge-base: add --merge-child option) John Keeping
2013-05-20 6:43 ` Jonathan Nieder
2013-05-13 15:00 ` [PATCH 0/2] Make --ancestry-path A...B work Kevin Bracey
2013-05-13 15:00 ` [PATCH 1/2] t6019: demonstrate --ancestry-path A...B breakage Kevin Bracey
2013-05-13 15:00 ` [PATCH 2/2] revision.c: treat A...B merge bases as if manually specified Kevin Bracey
2013-05-13 16:04 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-05-12 16:58 ` [RFC/PATCH 0/2] merge-base: add --merge-child option John Keeping
2013-05-12 17:29 ` Kevin Bracey [this message]
2013-05-13 5:02 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-05-13 7:52 ` John Keeping
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=518FD182.5020606@bracey.fi \
--to=kevin@bracey.fi \
--cc=git@drmicha.warpmail.net \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=john@keeping.me.uk \
--cc=jrnieder@gmail.com \
--cc=peff@peff.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).