From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: git-log vs git-rev-list Date: Fri, 30 May 2008 13:20:13 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: References: <20080530165641.GG18781@machine.or.cz> <20080530194635.GI593@machine.or.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: git@vger.kernel.org To: Petr Baudis X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri May 30 22:21:52 2008 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 1K2B68-00072Y-So for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Fri, 30 May 2008 22:21:13 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753038AbYE3UUU (ORCPT ); Fri, 30 May 2008 16:20:20 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751591AbYE3UUT (ORCPT ); Fri, 30 May 2008 16:20:19 -0400 Received: from smtp1.linux-foundation.org ([140.211.169.13]:37062 "EHLO smtp1.linux-foundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752906AbYE3UUS (ORCPT ); Fri, 30 May 2008 16:20:18 -0400 Received: from imap1.linux-foundation.org (imap1.linux-foundation.org [140.211.169.55]) by smtp1.linux-foundation.org (8.14.2/8.13.5/Debian-3ubuntu1.1) with ESMTP id m4UKKEBM018211 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 30 May 2008 13:20:15 -0700 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by imap1.linux-foundation.org (8.13.5.20060308/8.13.5/Debian-3ubuntu1.1) with ESMTP id m4UKKDFT009663; Fri, 30 May 2008 13:20:13 -0700 In-Reply-To: <20080530194635.GI593@machine.or.cz> User-Agent: Alpine 1.10 (LFD 962 2008-03-14) X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-3.395 required=5 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.4-osdl_revision__1.47__ X-MIMEDefang-Filter: lf$Revision: 1.188 $ X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.63 on 140.211.169.13 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Fri, 30 May 2008, Petr Baudis wrote: > > > > Why would you want to use "git-rev-list" at all? > > Because it was the natural command to access history from a script to me > and nothing in the documentation hinted me that I shouldn't use it. So use it. Or not. Just don't think it's the same as "git log". > Step back a bit: it's git-_REV_-list. Technically, --all --objects is > nonsensical operation to do on revision list either. Who cares? Why are you arguing against *facts*? The *fact* is, git rev-list can traverse the whole object chain. The *fact* is that git rev-list can do other operations that have nothing to do with logs (bisection, for example). The *fact* is that both git rev-list and git log can traverse a set of revisions, but that doesn't make them the same command. I totally don't see your arguments. They are pointless. git rev-list and git log already share all the relevant internal machinery for the things where they overlap in capabilities. And the fact that they output different things is because they are different. Linus