From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [PATCH] git-rev-list.txt: rev stands for revision, not reverse. Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2007 13:12:37 -0700 Message-ID: <7vprys1k5m.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> References: <20071101084552.GA4934@ins.uni-bonn.de> <7vr6j9bv80.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> <20071102185509.GA5242@ins.uni-bonn.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: git@vger.kernel.org To: Ralf Wildenhues X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Nov 02 21:13:14 2007 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 1Io2t1-0005i1-Gi for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Fri, 02 Nov 2007 21:12:59 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756950AbXKBUMo (ORCPT ); Fri, 2 Nov 2007 16:12:44 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1756709AbXKBUMo (ORCPT ); Fri, 2 Nov 2007 16:12:44 -0400 Received: from sceptre.pobox.com ([207.106.133.20]:50068 "EHLO sceptre.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754209AbXKBUMn (ORCPT ); Fri, 2 Nov 2007 16:12:43 -0400 Received: from sceptre (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by sceptre.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 463BB2F0; Fri, 2 Nov 2007 16:13:04 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pobox.com (ip68-225-240-77.oc.oc.cox.net [68.225.240.77]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by sceptre.sasl.smtp.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C3B6191756; Fri, 2 Nov 2007 16:13:01 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <20071102185509.GA5242@ins.uni-bonn.de> (Ralf Wildenhues's message of "Fri, 2 Nov 2007 19:55:10 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Ralf Wildenhues writes: > Hello Junio, > > * Junio C Hamano wrote on Thu, Nov 01, 2007 at 08:51:11PM CET: >> Ralf Wildenhues writes: >> >> > Yes, believe it or not, but I stumbled over the synopsis >> > >> > | git-rev-list - Lists commit objects in reverse chronological order >> > >> > asking myself whether rev could possibly mean "reverse". >> > I hope this helps avoid this pitfall for others. >> >> In addition to your patch, >> >> git-rev-list - List commits from most recent to older >> >> might be a good rewording? > > Is the reverse chronological order the primary sorting key at all? It is mostly chrono but there is a topo element as well. You would never see a parent none of whose child is shown.