{"thread":{"id":"4152","subject":"RE: how to display file history?","startedAt":"2006-05-15T19:04:39Z","lastAt":"2006-05-15T19:04:39Z","messageCount":1,"participants":["Brown, Len"],"isPatch":false,"patchVersion":null,"patchTotal":null},"messages":[{"id":"20023","messageId":"CFF307C98FEABE47A452B27C06B85BB670FD1B@hdsmsx411.amr.corp.intel.com","threadId":"4152","inReplyTo":null,"subject":"RE: how to display file history?","fromName":"Brown, Len","fromEmail":"len.brown@intel.com","sentAt":"2006-05-15T19:04:39Z","receivedAt":"2006-05-15T19:04:39Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"len.brown@intel.com","avatar":"https://gravatar.com/avatar/a091f34f66caadb51d85a8a496800c6ccae73737e2f45762373e6b8c55fa5dd6?d=mp&s=160"},"body":" \n>> >\tgit log --stat -- A\n>> \n>> very handy indeed.\n>> \n>> I was surprised on initial use that --stat is\n>> limited to the file specified in \"A\" and doesn't\n>> expand to describe the entire commit that touches \"A\".\n>> (ie. the stat output is a subset of what is associated\n>> with the displayed commit comments).\n>> \n>> This, of course, is clear now, it just isn't what\n>> I expected on first use.\n>\n>Well,  you can obviously have your cake and eat it too (ie \n>\"--full-diff\").\n>\n>I don't often end up using the \"--full-diff\" thing. It's almost never \n>actually worth it until I find the diff that I actually start caring \n>about, and the full diff just makes it harder to see the part \n>I explicitly told git I was interested in.\n\nsounds good.\n\n>So the default \"show only diffs for the files asked for\" \n>behaviour is in my opinion much superior (and it used to be the only\none),\n>because the \"show the whole thing\" part ends up being something you use\nonly once \n>you've already skimmed the default case and decide to go deeper.\n\nI agree.\n\n>Of course, \"gitk\" ends up using the full diff by default in its diff \n>window. I'm not convinced that's the right thing, but usually \n>when I use gitk I'm primarily looking at the history and the commit\n>messages to decide if it's a relevant one, not the diff, so I don't\nthink \n>it matters.\n\nYeah, I agree that gitk is fine how it is.\n\nThe only part I don't agree with above is the word \"obviously\".\n'--full-diff --stats' didn't jump out at me from the man page.\n\nTo be fair, yes, I should probably take the time to read the docs\nthrough\nand not rely on the man pages, they've changed a lot since I last\nlooked.\n\n-Len\n"}]}