Re: [PATCH 2/2] show-branch: fix description of --date-order
- From
Thomas Rast <trast@inf.ethz.ch>
- Date
- Jul 16, 2013, 20:11 UTC
- Message-ID
- <87ehayqn84.fsf@hexa.v.cablecom.net>
- In-Reply-To
- <20130716182254.GL14690@google.com>
Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com> writes:
Show 20 quoted lines
> Thomas Rast wrote:
>
>> The existing description reads as if it somehow applies a filter.
>> Change it to explain that it is merely about the ordering.
> [...]
>> OPT_SET_INT(0, "date-order", &sort_order,
>> - N_("show commits where no parent comes before its "
>> + N_("sort commits such that no parent comes before its "
>> "children"),
>> REV_SORT_BY_COMMIT_DATE),
>
> I fear this wording tweak doesn't go far enough. The above
> description seems to describe --topo-order just as well as
> --date-order.
>
> How about something like
>
> N_("topologically sort, maintaining date order where possible"),
>
> ? I haven't checked the code to see if that's accurate, though.Same laziness here, as I never actually use show-branch. However, you're right, I missed that it also has --topo-order (with a much saner message). So I think we can safely assume that it's the same meaning as for git-log:
Show 18 quoted lines
> - by default, commits are listed in commit date order (newest first) > > - with --topo-order, they are topologically sorted in such a way as > to ensure that in cases like > > ---1---2---4---7 > \ \ > 3---5---6---8 > > (from git-log(1)), parallel tracks are not interleaved > > - with --date-order, they are topologically sorted but less > aggressively, in particular matching commit date order in the > usual case that that is already topologically sorted. > > That would make --topo-order stronger than "show commits in > topological order" --- it should say something like "sort trying to > avoid breaking up lines of development".
Depending on how you look at it, the lines of development are kept together purely by coincidence or algorithmic convenience...
--
Thomas Rast
trast@{inf,student}.ethz.ch