git log for only certain branches

git log for only certain branches

[Robert Dailey]

I have more details about my inquiry on StackOverflow:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/22823768/view-git-log-with-merges-for-only-certain-branches

Basically I'd like to know if it is possible to show the graph for
ONLY branches that I list. The key here is that the graph should also
show relationships between only those branches that I list. In other
words, any ancestors that I do not explicitly specify should not be
rendered in the graph.

I have an insanely huge number of branches in my git repo (we
transitioned from SVN so we haven't had a chance to clean them up
yet). As a result, the git log graph I see has literally 10-20
vertical lines and I have to scroll 20+ pages to follow a line to a
particular parent branch.

Re: git log for only certain branches

[Matthieu Moy]

Robert Dailey <rcdailey.lists@gmail.com> writes:

> I have more details about my inquiry on StackOverflow:
> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/22823768/view-git-log-with-merges-for-only-certain-branches
>
> Basically I'd like to know if it is possible to show the graph for
> ONLY branches that I list.

Not sure it'll directly answer your question, but did you read the
"History Simplification" part of "git log --help"?

-- 
Matthieu Moy
http://www-verimag.imag.fr/~moy/

Re: git log for only certain branches

[Michal Sojka]

On Tue, Apr 08 2014, Robert Dailey wrote:
> I have more details about my inquiry on StackOverflow:
> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/22823768/view-git-log-with-merges-for-only-certain-branches
>
> Basically I'd like to know if it is possible to show the graph for
> ONLY branches that I list. The key here is that the graph should also
> show relationships between only those branches that I list. In other
> words, any ancestors that I do not explicitly specify should not be
> rendered in the graph.

What about using ^<branch> notation to exclude certain branches? See for
example SPECIFYING RANGES in git-rev-parse(1).

-Michal

Re: git log for only certain branches

[Robert Dailey]

On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 12:08 PM, Matthieu Moy
<Matthieu.Moy@grenoble-inp.fr> wrote:
> Robert Dailey <rcdailey.lists@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> I have more details about my inquiry on StackOverflow:
>> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/22823768/view-git-log-with-merges-for-only-certain-branches
>>
>> Basically I'd like to know if it is possible to show the graph for
>> ONLY branches that I list.
>
> Not sure it'll directly answer your question, but did you read the
> "History Simplification" part of "git log --help"?

yes I did happen to read it but it makes my head spin. There's just
too much information there for me. I don't really know what
combination of options would give me what I want. However, it does
seem like the answer is in there somewhere.

Re: git log for only certain branches

[Junio C Hamano]

Robert Dailey <rcdailey.lists@gmail.com> writes:

> I have more details about my inquiry on StackOverflow:
> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/22823768/view-git-log-with-merges-for-only-certain-branches
>
> Basically I'd like to know if it is possible to show the graph for
> ONLY branches that I list. The key here is that the graph should also
> show relationships between only those branches that I list. In other
> words, any ancestors that I do not explicitly specify should not be
> rendered in the graph.
>
> I have an insanely huge number of branches in my git repo (we
> transitioned from SVN so we haven't had a chance to clean them up
> yet). As a result, the git log graph I see has literally 10-20
> vertical lines and I have to scroll 20+ pages to follow a line to a
> particular parent branch.

I do not quite get this part (note that it is impolite to ask people
to go to stackoverflow or any external site to answer questions
asked here, but I am making an exception today):

  $ git log --oneline --graph origin/master origin/topic1

  It will show all branches anyway, even though I've specified I only
  want to see two of them.

These should show commits reachable from these two branches,
origin/master and origin/topic1, and nothing else.

  $ git log --oneline --graph \
    origin/master origin/topic1 \
    --not $(git merge-base --all origin/master origin/topic1)

would stop where the histories of these two branches meet (assuming
that you consider that the common ancestors of these two not
interesting when you say "all branches anyway", but these common
ancestors are still part of these two branches ;-).