From: Martin Langhoff Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2005 04:37:32 GMT Subject: Re: [RFC] faking cvs annotate Message-ID: <46a038f90512152037u66993aadg566a2a47abd279c9@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: On 12/16/05, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > For starters, you could use my attempt: > http://www.gelato.unsw.edu.au/archives/git/0508/7171.html Not bad at all! I might simplify it a bit (won't need the commitmsg parsing), and see if how fast I can make it. > It does not fool any CVS user, Ah, no. Those have been fooled already ;-) > However, I learnt to use git-whatchanged in the meantime, and I'll > probably never go back. Of course. I'm trying to meet a few the expectations of popular cvs clients (cli, TortoiseCVS, Eclipse, etc). If a workable git-annotate falls out of this, oh well. OTOH, yours didn't get included. Any particular reasons? (other than stressing the point that you should use whatchanged/pickaxe?) Also! On 12/16/05, Junio C Hamano wrote: > I haven't actively done anything but one of the good things that > could happen is to split out the access routines for annotate > database qgit build when run the first time in the repository, > and make them available to other Porcelains. There is no need > to reinvent the wheel. That would be cool! Though my particular implementation may be a tad unconventional in its view of the "file history" as a strictly linear thing. Normal git porcelains don't even blink when dealing with branching/merging development histories. cheers, martin