{"thread":{"id":"7795","subject":"git rev-list --boundary from..to","startedAt":"2007-04-23T13:34:54Z","lastAt":"2007-04-23T14:53:14Z","messageCount":4,"participants":["Santi Béjar","Johannes Schindelin"],"isPatch":false,"patchVersion":null,"patchTotal":null},"messages":[{"id":"40197","messageId":"8aa486160704230634m130d1877k9e965847a2029751@mail.gmail.com","threadId":"7795","inReplyTo":null,"subject":"git rev-list --boundary from..to","fromName":"Santi Béjar","fromEmail":"sbejar@gmail.com","sentAt":"2007-04-23T13:34:54Z","receivedAt":"2007-04-23T13:34:54Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"santi@agolina.net","avatar":null},"body":"Hi *,\n\n git rev-list ${order} --boundary ${commitlimit}\n\n is what is used in gitk. In v1.5.0.3:\n\n $ gitk from..to\n\nshows the boundary commits next to the child, but it is no longer the\ncase since v1.5.0.3-290-g86ab490.\n\n Now all the boundary commits are at the bottom.\n\n While at it, when used with --max-count they are at the bottom too,\nand I understand why, but is there a way to tell \"show me the boundary\ncommits next to the child even if it means it takes more time\"?\n\n Thank you in advance\n\n Santi\n"},{"id":"40202","messageId":"Pine.LNX.4.64.0704231624400.8822@racer.site","threadId":"7795","inReplyTo":"8aa486160704230634m130d1877k9e965847a2029751@mail.gmail.com","subject":"Re: git rev-list --boundary from..to","fromName":"Johannes Schindelin","fromEmail":"johannes.schindelin@gmx.de","sentAt":"2007-04-23T14:25:32Z","receivedAt":"2007-04-23T14:25:32Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"johannes.schindelin@gmx.de","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/127790?v=4"},"body":"Hi,\n\nOn Mon, 23 Apr 2007, Santi Béjar wrote:\n\n> git rev-list ${order} --boundary ${commitlimit}\n> \n> is what is used in gitk. In v1.5.0.3:\n> \n> $ gitk from..to\n> \n> shows the boundary commits next to the child, but it is no longer the\n> case since v1.5.0.3-290-g86ab490.\n>\n> Now all the boundary commits are at the bottom.\n> \n> While at it, when used with --max-count they are at the bottom too,\n> and I understand why, but is there a way to tell \"show me the boundary\n> commits next to the child even if it means it takes more time\"?\n\nI'd say \"--parents\", and infer the relevant information. While I agree \nthat it was nicer to scripts earlier, IMHO it was incorrect, too.\n\nHth,\nDscho\n"},{"id":"40203","messageId":"8aa486160704230738t75c90777k3787032fa4e348fb@mail.gmail.com","threadId":"7795","inReplyTo":"Pine.LNX.4.64.0704231624400.8822@racer.site","subject":"Re: git rev-list --boundary from..to","fromName":"Santi Béjar","fromEmail":"sbejar@gmail.com","sentAt":"2007-04-23T14:38:34Z","receivedAt":"2007-04-23T14:38:34Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"santi@agolina.net","avatar":null},"body":"On 4/23/07, Johannes Schindelin wrote:\n> Hi,\n>\n> On Mon, 23 Apr 2007, Santi Béjar wrote:\n>\n> > git rev-list ${order} --boundary ${commitlimit}\n> >\n> > is what is used in gitk. In v1.5.0.3:\n> >\n> > $ gitk from..to\n> >\n> > shows the boundary commits next to the child, but it is no longer the\n> > case since v1.5.0.3-290-g86ab490.\n> >\n> > Now all the boundary commits are at the bottom.\n> >\n> > While at it, when used with --max-count they are at the bottom too,\n> > and I understand why, but is there a way to tell \"show me the boundary\n> > commits next to the child even if it means it takes more time\"?\n>\n> I'd say \"--parents\", and infer the relevant information.\n\nSorry, I think I did not expressed it quite well. The \"next to the\nchild\" was about the order git-rev-list outputs the commits, not about\nthe parent information (moreover gitk uses --parents).\n\n\n> While I agree\n> that it was nicer to scripts earlier, IMHO it was incorrect, too.\n\nSorry but I do not understand what is incorrect. Are you talking about\nthe regression or about the --max-count question?\n\nSanti\n"},{"id":"40204","messageId":"Pine.LNX.4.64.0704231650280.8822@racer.site","threadId":"7795","inReplyTo":"8aa486160704230738t75c90777k3787032fa4e348fb@mail.gmail.com","subject":"Re: git rev-list --boundary from..to","fromName":"Johannes Schindelin","fromEmail":"johannes.schindelin@gmx.de","sentAt":"2007-04-23T14:53:14Z","receivedAt":"2007-04-23T14:53:14Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"johannes.schindelin@gmx.de","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/127790?v=4"},"body":"Hi,\n\nOn Mon, 23 Apr 2007, Santi Béjar wrote:\n\n> On 4/23/07, Johannes Schindelin wrote:\n> >\n> > On Mon, 23 Apr 2007, Santi Béjar wrote:\n> >\n> > > git rev-list ${order} --boundary ${commitlimit}\n> > >\n> > > is what is used in gitk. In v1.5.0.3:\n> > >\n> > > $ gitk from..to\n> > >\n> > > shows the boundary commits next to the child, but it is no longer the\n> > > case since v1.5.0.3-290-g86ab490.\n> > >\n> > > Now all the boundary commits are at the bottom.\n> > >\n> > > While at it, when used with --max-count they are at the bottom too,\n> > > and I understand why, but is there a way to tell \"show me the boundary\n> > > commits next to the child even if it means it takes more time\"?\n> >\n> > I'd say \"--parents\", and infer the relevant information.\n> \n> Sorry, I think I did not expressed it quite well. The \"next to the \n> child\" was about the order git-rev-list outputs the commits, not about \n> the parent information (moreover gitk uses --parents).\n\nI meant that you can use \"--parents\" to reorder the revs, so that the \nboundary commits come directly after their children.\n\n> > While I agree that it was nicer to scripts earlier, IMHO it was \n> > incorrect, too.\n> \n> Sorry but I do not understand what is incorrect. Are you talking about \n> the regression or about the --max-count question?\n\nAFAICT the calculation of what makes a boundary commit was wrong before, \nand as a consequence of the fixed method, you see the boundary commits at \nthe end.\n\nTo \"fix\" the order back to what you are used to, rev-list would have to do \na specialized topological sort on top of what it does right now. Since not \nall users of rev-list--boundary need that, it should not be changed IMHO, \nat least by default.\n\nCiao,\nDscho\n"}]}