From: Mike Hommey Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2007 13:33:14 GMT Subject: Re: Confusion about diffing branches Message-ID: <20070827133314.GA9131@glandium.org> In-Reply-To: <38b2ab8a0708270621l63f3da56j4667014e62a5de92@mail.gmail.com> On Mon, Aug 27, 2007 at 03:21:32PM +0200, Francis Moreau wrote: > Hi ! > > On 8/27/07, Mike Hommey wrote: > > On Mon, Aug 27, 2007 at 12:07:39AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > > Both semantics of two-dot form and three-dot form are useful, > > > and choice between the two depends on what you want out of the > > > command. You just need to know which one you want. > > > > The problem is not about usefulness of these 2 forms, but consistency > > with the rest of the tools. > > If I go git log a..b, I won't get the set of commits involved in > > git diff a..b. In fact, git log a...b does. And git log a..b gives the > > commits involved in git diff a...b. Confusing, isn't it ? > > Moreover, this inconsistency isn't even documented in the manual pages. > > > > This "inconsistency" had already been raised before. Please refer to: > http://www.gelato.unsw.edu.au/archives/git/0612/35354.html > > I shared and still share your feeling about that but it seems that > Junio and Linus don't... Actually, they may have a good point, cf. the thread you point. But it is annoying that it is not documented. Mike