From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Johannes Schindelin Subject: Re: git rev-list --boundary from..to Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2007 16:53:14 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: References: <8aa486160704230634m130d1877k9e965847a2029751@mail.gmail.com> <8aa486160704230738t75c90777k3787032fa4e348fb@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: MULTIPART/MIXED; BOUNDARY="8323584-287112035-1177339994=:8822" Cc: Git Mailing List To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Santi_B=E9jar?= X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon Apr 23 16:53:53 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1HfzvK-0004CY-MQ for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Mon, 23 Apr 2007 16:53:51 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751653AbXDWOxr (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Apr 2007 10:53:47 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751861AbXDWOxr (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Apr 2007 10:53:47 -0400 Received: from mail.gmx.net ([213.165.64.20]:58595 "HELO mail.gmx.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1751653AbXDWOxq (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Apr 2007 10:53:46 -0400 Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 23 Apr 2007 14:53:45 -0000 Received: from unknown (EHLO [138.251.11.74]) [138.251.11.74] by mail.gmx.net (mp049) with SMTP; 23 Apr 2007 16:53:45 +0200 X-Authenticated: #1490710 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1/7ls1LbMH7iimBY00kUVmbCVKBiyHhTS8mE9pzxO lbDnPVJZosVeMs X-X-Sender: gene099@racer.site In-Reply-To: <8aa486160704230738t75c90777k3787032fa4e348fb@mail.gmail.com> X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text, while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools. --8323584-287112035-1177339994=:8822 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Hi, On Mon, 23 Apr 2007, Santi Béjar wrote: > On 4/23/07, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > > > > On Mon, 23 Apr 2007, Santi Béjar wrote: > > > > > git rev-list ${order} --boundary ${commitlimit} > > > > > > is what is used in gitk. In v1.5.0.3: > > > > > > $ gitk from..to > > > > > > shows the boundary commits next to the child, but it is no longer the > > > case since v1.5.0.3-290-g86ab490. > > > > > > Now all the boundary commits are at the bottom. > > > > > > While at it, when used with --max-count they are at the bottom too, > > > and I understand why, but is there a way to tell "show me the boundary > > > commits next to the child even if it means it takes more time"? > > > > I'd say "--parents", and infer the relevant information. > > Sorry, I think I did not expressed it quite well. The "next to the > child" was about the order git-rev-list outputs the commits, not about > the parent information (moreover gitk uses --parents). I meant that you can use "--parents" to reorder the revs, so that the boundary commits come directly after their children. > > While I agree that it was nicer to scripts earlier, IMHO it was > > incorrect, too. > > Sorry but I do not understand what is incorrect. Are you talking about > the regression or about the --max-count question? AFAICT the calculation of what makes a boundary commit was wrong before, and as a consequence of the fixed method, you see the boundary commits at the end. To "fix" the order back to what you are used to, rev-list would have to do a specialized topological sort on top of what it does right now. Since not all users of rev-list--boundary need that, it should not be changed IMHO, at least by default. Ciao, Dscho --8323584-287112035-1177339994=:8822--