From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: --first-parent plus path limiting Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 01:11:35 -0800 Message-ID: <7v63xdov20.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> References: <479EE405.1010001@viscovery.net> <7vk5ltow61.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> <479EEC3D.9030100@viscovery.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Git Mailing List To: Johannes Sixt X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Jan 29 10:13:02 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 1JJmWS-0007PU-LY for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Tue, 29 Jan 2008 10:12:53 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755786AbYA2JLs (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Jan 2008 04:11:48 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754278AbYA2JLs (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Jan 2008 04:11:48 -0500 Received: from a-sasl-quonix.sasl.smtp.pobox.com ([208.72.237.25]:57237 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754100AbYA2JLq (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Jan 2008 04:11:46 -0500 Received: from a-sasl-quonix (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D34133C01; Tue, 29 Jan 2008 04:11:44 -0500 (EST) Received: from pobox.com (ip68-225-240-77.oc.oc.cox.net [68.225.240.77]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by a-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E67F3C00; Tue, 29 Jan 2008 04:11:42 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <479EEC3D.9030100@viscovery.net> (Johannes Sixt's message of "Tue, 29 Jan 2008 10:05:01 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Johannes Sixt writes: > I was expecting that it works like "First follow the first-parent, and > then simplify the history with respect to builtin-fetch.c." If you first follow the first-parent, the result will by definition not have any merges, so there is nothing left to simplify. History simplification is about merge removal, looking at all parents. Removing commits from a single strand of pearls that do not touch the specified pathspecs is called "--dense" (which is on the default) and can be disabled with "--sparse". So, no, it is not a matter of definition, as "first follow the first-parent then simplify" does not make much sense.