Re: [PATCH] (experimental) per-topic shortlog.

From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Date: Nov 28, 2006, 13:56 UTC
Message-ID: <20061128135614.GA29505@coredump.intra.peff.net>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.63.0611281439500.30004@wbgn013.biozentrum.uni-wuerzburg.de>

On Tue, Nov 28, 2006 at 02:43:49PM +0100, Johannes Schindelin wrote:

Show 8 quoted lines

> BTW merge-recursive is a perfect example why this approach will break 
> down: most of the rewrite in C took place in a private repository with 
> quite some commits. This does not show in the git repository.
> 
> I fully expect the linux repository to behave similarly, since most of the 
> features are cooked elsewhere, and not all of them are pulled, but some 
> are applied (i.e. they appear out of nowhere from the repository's 
> viewpoint).

Yes, I think this would be more useful in concert with some sort of grouping. If we can make a group of commits related to merge-recursive, and score them as a single item, then they can be compared to other groups (which may consist of a single commit or several).