From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [PATCH] Teach revision walker about reflog ranges Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2007 16:16:00 -0800 Message-ID: <7vve6h9gvz.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: git@vger.kernel.org To: Johannes Schindelin X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sun Dec 30 01:16:39 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 1J8lr5-0000rq-1P for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Sun, 30 Dec 2007 01:16:39 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752659AbXL3AQI (ORCPT ); Sat, 29 Dec 2007 19:16:08 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752653AbXL3AQH (ORCPT ); Sat, 29 Dec 2007 19:16:07 -0500 Received: from a-sasl-quonix.sasl.smtp.pobox.com ([208.72.237.25]:38223 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752569AbXL3AQG (ORCPT ); Sat, 29 Dec 2007 19:16:06 -0500 Received: from a-sasl-quonix (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 21644543C; Sat, 29 Dec 2007 19:16:05 -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 A1E3C5439; Sat, 29 Dec 2007 19:16:02 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: (Johannes Schindelin's message of "Sun, 30 Dec 2007 00:02:11 +0100 (CET)") 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 Schindelin writes: > Now you can ask for a revision range > > master@{2.weeks.ago..1.day.ago} > > or even something like > > HEAD@{20..yesterday} You can _ask_ all you want, but it is not clear what it does from this description. I guess you are rewriting master@{A..B} to master@{A}..master@{B}, but that is not clear from the commit log nor documentation (did I even see a documentation patch?). Also, I am not convinced that the rewrite gives the semantics the users naturally expect from @{A..B}. I would even suspect that people would expect "git log master@{0..2}" to behave more like "git show master@{0} master@{1} master@{2}".