From: Junio C Hamano Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2007 20:12:37 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH] git-rev-list.txt: rev stands for revision, not reverse. Message-ID: <7vprys1k5m.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> In-Reply-To: <20071102185509.GA5242@ins.uni-bonn.de> Ralf Wildenhues writes: > Hello Junio, > > * Junio C Hamano wrote on Thu, Nov 01, 2007 at 08:51:11PM CET: >> Ralf Wildenhues writes: >> >> > Yes, believe it or not, but I stumbled over the synopsis >> > >> > | git-rev-list - Lists commit objects in reverse chronological order >> > >> > asking myself whether rev could possibly mean "reverse". >> > I hope this helps avoid this pitfall for others. >> >> In addition to your patch, >> >> git-rev-list - List commits from most recent to older >> >> might be a good rewording? > > Is the reverse chronological order the primary sorting key at all? It is mostly chrono but there is a topo element as well. You would never see a parent none of whose child is shown.