From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: git log -z doesn't separate commits with NULs Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2012 13:14:05 -0800 Message-ID: <7vk43cx7c2.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> References: <4F46036F.3040406@gmail.com> <20120223102426.GB2912@sigill.intra.peff.net> <4F462E61.4020203@gmail.com> <4F4643BB.8090001@gmail.com> <20120223193451.GB30132@sigill.intra.peff.net> <7vy5rt2u0c.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> <4F475689.4040203@gmail.com> <20120224095253.GC11846@sigill.intra.peff.net> <7vsji0xalg.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> <20120224204615.GB21447@sigill.intra.peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Nikolaj Shurkaev , Jakub Narebski , git@vger.kernel.org To: Jeff King X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Feb 24 22:14:23 2012 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 1S12T2-00064Y-5Z for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Fri, 24 Feb 2012 22:14:16 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758111Ab2BXVOJ (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Feb 2012 16:14:09 -0500 Received: from b-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com ([208.72.237.35]:55095 "EHLO smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756160Ab2BXVOI (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Feb 2012 16:14:08 -0500 Received: from smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by b-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 01ADA6EEB; Fri, 24 Feb 2012 16:14:08 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=kwBxqTTvOdsBRGcn6Rte2So/Nmg=; b=d2U5Ay 0x3x0k5M5bAYCLORrGxqMSSDPNum3hASCArMuk1c+cxXWXk9SUjHRDod2Yw9c23i ukuqVHVk+pb0OfjNXbqVFeRN2ObYjmlSzy6KN6Xu2x225FcXBTV6DaBz2IuIEOpw b35nDw2Txz0wztcBW8Sa8pTrZKhY7jNRFWvz0= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=a6UiAJ90nJkSJ7Lh5VZbpqYLqqmzOqjj qEyTGoh7aYdhfVpxTaFHK689gsEaA1CG2xYzfSlRxFDsXV2h/757Hk/pHFK/2C64 MRpkWRWWFBn1IVR+E5yjUk8DE8P7J9tkQV39VH62HFVxsN7cfMmB9Q8+S5iB+daz BujEiST3hPY= Received: from b-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by b-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E4AE86EE5; Fri, 24 Feb 2012 16:14:07 -0500 (EST) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [76.102.170.102]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by b-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 68F2D6EE4; Fri, 24 Feb 2012 16:14:07 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <20120224204615.GB21447@sigill.intra.peff.net> (Jeff King's message of "Fri, 24 Feb 2012 15:46:15 -0500") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 7CC69522-5F2C-11E1-A806-9DB42E706CDE-77302942!b-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Jeff King writes: > True. That is also a slightly dangerous thing to do, though, because you > are omitting full patches in the middle that touch the same paths as the > patches you include.... > ... So > perhaps we are better off to refer the user to git-log(1), say that > commit limiting options in general would work, but be careful with > sending a partial result. You seem to have spelled out everything I originally wrote in my reply that I later deleted before sending it out, and I think the reason that brought you to the three-line conclusion is the same one that made me I delete them ;-). Using a partial patch essentially has the same risk as cherry-picking a commit into different context, and it is a more generic issue that this particular manual page should not waste tons of space to teach readers about. I think "Be careful and clueful" is sufficient and the best we can do without writing a textbook on distributed software development disciplines. > ... I tend to think the > commit-limiting options are the useful and working ones, which is why I > suggested mentioning them explicitly above. I think I agree that is a sane thing to do.