Re: Avoiding uninteresting merges in Cairo

From: Jakub Narebski <jnareb@gmail.com>
Date: Dec 15, 2006, 15:57 UTC
Message-ID: <200612151657.06909.jnareb@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20061215150130.GB17860@spearce.org>

Shawn Pearce wrote:

Show 23 quoted lines

> Jakub Narebski <jnareb@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Carl Worth wrote:
>> 
>>> On Thu, 14 Dec 2006 22:25:30 -0500, Shawn Pearce wrote:
>> 
>>>>  * gitweb made it appear as though a whole lot of Carl's recent
>>>>    work was somehow undone in the merge.
>>> 
>>> That looks like a simple gitweb bug. None of the other tools, (gitk,
>>> git log -p), consider a trivial merge commit like this as having
>>> anything interesting in it worth displaying.
>> 
>> It's not a bug, it is rather lack of feature (or misfeature).
> 
> Its a bug.
> 
> I'm not a gitweb user (meaning I almost never look at something
> in gitweb).  But I'm clearly also not a Git newbie.  ;-)
> 
> I could not fathom why that merge commit was being displayed that
> way in gitweb.  I had to clone the cairo project just so I could
> actually look at the commit with log/show/whatchanged/diff-tree,
> because I couldn't believe what I was seeing from gitweb.

Do you mean "commit" view or "commitdiff" view in gitweb for merges is confusing?

If it is "commit" view, it is fairly easy to remove difftree/whatchanged output below commit message for merges. However while git-show nor git-diff-tree doesn't show diff for merge messages, the diftree output in "commit" view might be taken as 'damages'; git diff --summary always takes summary of diff against first parent.

If it is "commitdiff" view... well, I plan on adding combined diff output to commitdiff, but I need raw (whatchanged) output with the same files which would be shown in git-diff --cc for merges (compact combined diff output). Otherwise I'd have to use combined (-c) output in gitweb, rather than more terse --cc output.

-- 
Jakub Narebski