Re: [RFC PATCH] Documentation: rev-list-options: clarify history simplification with paths
- From
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
- Date
- Aug 10, 2008, 21:58 UTC
- Message-ID
- <7v63q8353m.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org>
- In-Reply-To
- <alpine.LFD.1.10.0808101226130.3462@nehalem.linux-foundation.org>
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> writes:
Show 15 quoted lines
> On Sun, 10 Aug 2008, Junio C Hamano wrote: >> >> Personally I do not think --full-history without --parents is of much >> usefulness (I'd let Linus or somebody else defend this usage, or make it >> imply revs.rewrite_parents otherwise). If you remove that case from your >> set of experiments in the equation, do the rest of the results make sense? > > Oh, it's _very_ useful. > > The most common case is "git whatchanged". It's useful to find a commit > that did some change _without_ any graphical front-end. > > And then the merges and parenthood are totally pointless - no human can > try to tie things together in their head _anyway_, so why show them? You > just want to find the change.
Oh, I was not talking about revs.print_parents part, but about revs.rewrite_parents part. What got Thomas puzzled about was exactly how the set of commits _shown_ are different with and without --parents, which sets both of these internal flags. Your "pointless" argument applies to "print_parents" part, but "rewrite_parents" affects the resulting set.