git.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Derrick Stolee <stolee@gmail.com>
To: Josh Tepper <josh@clarifai.com>, git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Bug: git log: boundary commits do not respect order (e.g. date-order, topo-order) 2
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2018 14:29:36 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <cc579f55-cb5c-d6fb-c03f-f180137e5c25@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAPFeJUAF99buo=yTZQeHawU-npLHk0iJ1iQxYwMroFdDcKhqjA@mail.gmail.com>

On 2/21/2018 6:57 PM, Josh Tepper wrote:
> When using git log, boundary commits (ie, those commits added by
> specifying --boundary) do not respect the order (e.g., --date-order,
> --topo-order).  Consider the following commit history, where number
> indicates the order of the commit timestamps:
>
> <view with a fixed with font! 3's ancestor is 1, 6's ancestors are 4,5>
> 0----1----2----5  <--A
>         \         \
>           3----4----6  <--B
>
>
> Executing the following command:
>
> $ git log --boundary --date-order ^A B
>
> Should produce the following order (boundary commits shown with dashes):
> 6 -5 4 3 -1
>
> However, it in fact produces:
> 6 4 3 -5 -1
>
> Please advise.
>

Hi Josh,

Looking at the docs [1], I don't see any specifics on how the boundary 
commits should be ordered.

Clearly, the implementation specifies that the boundary is written after 
all other commits. For a full discussion of this, see the commit message 
for 86ab4906a7c "revision walker: Fix --boundary when limited". Here is 
an excerpt:

      - After get_revision() finishes giving out all the positive
        commits, if we are doing the boundary processing, we look at
        the parents that we marked as potential boundaries earlier,
        see if they are really boundaries, and give them out.

The boundary commits are correctly sorted by topo-order among themselves 
as of commit 4603ec0f960 "get_revision(): honor the topo_order flag for 
boundary commits".

So, I'm not sure that this is a bug (it is working "as designed") but it 
certainly is non-obvious behavior.

In what use case do you need these boundary commits to appear earlier?

Thanks,
-Stolee

[1] https://git-scm.com/docs/git-log



  reply	other threads:[~2018-02-22 19:29 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-02-21 23:57 Bug: git log: boundary commits do not respect order (e.g. date-order, topo-order) 2 Josh Tepper
2018-02-22 19:29 ` Derrick Stolee [this message]
     [not found]   ` <CAPFeJUCkcWMJMt6Eam3NrnYUWXgOS+GB695pzgL+QJsvgOgWWQ@mail.gmail.com>
2018-03-01 19:25     ` Josh Tepper

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=cc579f55-cb5c-d6fb-c03f-f180137e5c25@gmail.com \
    --to=stolee@gmail.com \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=josh@clarifai.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).