{"thread":{"id":"13176","subject":"Re: [PATCH] Docs gitk: Explicitly mention -d, --date-order option","startedAt":"2008-04-18T13:16:40Z","lastAt":"2011-04-01T08:05:31Z","messageCount":5,"participants":["Clifford Caoile","Junio C Hamano","Raimund Bauer","Robert Pollak"],"isPatch":true,"patchVersion":1,"patchTotal":null},"messages":[{"id":"74731","messageId":"1f748ec60804180616i311571eftbabcd3133ff83302@mail.gmail.com","threadId":"13176","inReplyTo":null,"subject":"Re: [PATCH] Docs gitk: Explicitly mention -d, --date-order option","fromName":"Clifford Caoile","fromEmail":"piyo@users.sourceforge.net","sentAt":"2008-04-18T13:16:40Z","receivedAt":"2008-04-18T13:16:40Z","isPatch":true,"sender":{"key":"piyo@users.sourceforge.net","avatar":null},"body":"Git Mailing List, Git Maintainer:\n\nRegarding the documentation patch \"[PATCH] Docs gitk: Explicitly\nmention -d, --date-order option\" [1] (2008-04-12), it has not been\naccepted. Is there problem with this patch?\n\nReferences:\n[1] http://marc.info/?l=git&m=120799377618677&w=2\n\nBest regards,\nClifford Caoile\n"},{"id":"74739","messageId":"7v1w52ib5d.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org","threadId":"13176","inReplyTo":"1f748ec60804180616i311571eftbabcd3133ff83302@mail.gmail.com","subject":"Re: [PATCH] Docs gitk: Explicitly mention -d, --date-order option","fromName":"Junio C Hamano","fromEmail":"gitster@pobox.com","sentAt":"2008-04-19T06:58:22Z","receivedAt":"2008-04-19T06:58:22Z","isPatch":true,"sender":{"key":"gitster@pobox.com","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/54884?v=4"},"body":"\"Clifford Caoile\" writes:\n\n> Git Mailing List, Git Maintainer:\n\nHeh, my name is not \"Git Maintainer\" ;-)\n\n> Regarding the documentation patch \"[PATCH] Docs gitk: Explicitly\n> mention -d, --date-order option\" [1] (2008-04-12), it has not been\n> accepted. Is there problem with this patch?\n>\n> References:\n> [1] http://marc.info/?l=git&m=120799377618677&w=2\n\nThere isn't anything _wrong_ with the patch per se, but the current\ndocumentation refers you to rev-list page and limits itself to the most\noften used options.\n\nI was waiting to see that many people jumping up and down saying that the\nomission of --date-order from the \"most often used\" set was a grave bug\nbefore applying it. It hasn't happened.\n"},{"id":"74740","messageId":"1208590080.6426.7.camel@doriath","threadId":"13176","inReplyTo":"7v1w52ib5d.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org","subject":"Re: [PATCH] Docs gitk: Explicitly mention -d, --date-order option","fromName":"Raimund Bauer","fromEmail":"ray007@gmx.net","sentAt":"2008-04-19T07:28:00Z","receivedAt":"2008-04-19T07:28:00Z","isPatch":true,"sender":{"key":"ray007@gmx.net","avatar":null},"body":"On Fri, 2008-04-18 at 23:58 -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:\n> I was waiting to see that many people jumping up and down saying that the\n> omission of --date-order from the \"most often used\" set was a grave bug\n> before applying it. It hasn't happened.\n\nI'm glad we had this thread because I missed this option before ... \n\nbest regards,\nRay\n"},{"id":"74741","messageId":"1f748ec60804190035x194a9bc2qfd2287daaa4e1860@mail.gmail.com","threadId":"13176","inReplyTo":"7v1w52ib5d.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org","subject":"Re: [PATCH] Docs gitk: Explicitly mention -d, --date-order option","fromName":"Clifford Caoile","fromEmail":"piyo@users.sourceforge.net","sentAt":"2008-04-19T07:35:49Z","receivedAt":"2008-04-19T07:35:49Z","isPatch":true,"sender":{"key":"piyo@users.sourceforge.net","avatar":null},"body":"Junio C Hamano:\n\nOn Sat, Apr 19, 2008 at 3:58 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:\n> \"Clifford Caoile\" writes:\n> > Git Mailing List, Git Maintainer:\n> Heh, my name is not \"Git Maintainer\" ;-)\n\nSorry about that. Just adding another layer of indirection. >:-]\n\n> > Regarding the documentation patch \"[PATCH] Docs gitk: Explicitly\n> > mention -d, --date-order option\" [1] (2008-04-12), it has not been\n> > accepted. Is there problem with this patch?\n> >\n> > References:\n> > [1] http://marc.info/?l=git&m=120799377618677&w=2\n>\n> There isn't anything _wrong_ with the patch per se, but the current\n> documentation refers you to rev-list page and limits itself to the most\n> often used options.\n>\n> I was waiting to see that many people jumping up and down saying that the\n> omission of --date-order from the \"most often used\" set was a grave bug\n> before applying it. It hasn't happened.\n\nThe whole motivation for adding this documentation is to show that\ngitk has the same sorting function as git-browser. I only learned of\nthis capability through the irc channel.\n\nAs a git newbie, it wasn't obvious to me that \"--date-order\" was an\navailable option. It has become my usual parameter when launching gitk\non branch/merge heavy repos. Besides, and more importantly, the\nequivalent \"-d\" is a gitk only parameter that should probably be\ndocumented as well. I had to read the gitk tcl source for that one.\n;-)\n\nBest regards,\nClifford Caoile\n"},{"id":"164860","messageId":"4D95874B.9040209@jku.at","threadId":"13176","inReplyTo":"7v1w52ib5d.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org","subject":"Re: [PATCH] Docs gitk: Explicitly mention -d, --date-order option","fromName":"Robert Pollak","fromEmail":"robert.pollak@jku.at","sentAt":"2011-04-01T08:05:31Z","receivedAt":"2011-04-01T08:05:31Z","isPatch":true,"sender":{"key":"robert.pollak@jku.at","avatar":null},"body":"Hello Junio,\n\nyou wrote on 2008-04-18:\n> \"Clifford Caoile\" writes:\n[...]\n>> Regarding the documentation patch \"[PATCH] Docs gitk: Explicitly\n>> mention -d, --date-order option\" [1] (2008-04-12), it has not been\n>> accepted. Is there problem with this patch?\n>>\n>> References:\n>> [1] http://marc.info/?l=git&m=120799377618677&w=2\n> \n> There isn't anything _wrong_ with the patch per se, but the current\n> documentation refers you to rev-list page and limits itself to the most\n> often used options.\n> \n> I was waiting to see that many people jumping up and down saying that the\n> omission of --date-order from the \"most often used\" set was a grave bug\n> before applying it. It hasn't happened.\n\nThis thread has helped me finding \"-d\" (which is gitk-specific). So\nhere's my vote for the patch, FWIW.\n\nRobert\n"}]}