From: Simon 'corecode' Schubert Date: Sat, 20 Jan 2007 04:02:34 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH] Lose perl dependency. (fwd) Message-ID: <45B1945A.1000400@fs.ei.tum.de> In-Reply-To: <7vfya69xym.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> Junio C Hamano wrote: > I think there are two very valid ways. You determine what you > would spit out as if there is no --reverse, and then reverse the > result, or you do not limit with them to get everthing, reverse > the result and do the counting limit on that reversed list. We were originally coming from replacing a perl -e 'print reverse <>' in git-rebase. So I'd say the former. > If you do the latter, you would be able to get the first four > commits in the chronological order. I do not think that is > usually of much practical value (although people new to git > always seem to ask "how do I get to the root commit" at least > once), but there may be some valid uses for that kind of > behaviour. But I doubt that "--reverse" would suggest that. Commit Ordering By default, the commits are shown in reverse chronological order. so --reverse would mean no-reverse, i.e. forward. well, acceptable :) So if --reverse is an option to influence the output after the commit ordering, it is clearly the former. I don't think the latter makes much sense, anyways. cheers simon -- Serve - BSD +++ RENT this banner advert +++ ASCII Ribbon /"\ Work - Mac +++ space for low €€€ NOW!1 +++ Campaign \ / Party Enjoy Relax | http://dragonflybsd.org Against HTML \ Dude 2c 2 the max ! http://golden-apple.biz Mail + News / \