From: David Kastrup Date: Fri, 09 May 2014 19:59:22 GMT Subject: Re: Output from "git blame A..B -- path" for the bottom commit is misleading Message-ID: <87lhuayb8l.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> In-Reply-To: Junio C Hamano writes: > Jeff King writes: > >> On Fri, May 09, 2014 at 07:04:05AM +0200, David Kastrup wrote: >> >>> Arguably if the user explicitly limited the range, he knows what he's >>> looking at. Admittedly, I don't know offhand which options _will_ >>> produce boundary commit indications: there may be some without explicit >>> range limitation, and we might also be talking about limiting through >>> shallow repos (git blame on a shallow repo is probably a bad idea in the >>> first place, but anyway). >> >> Yes, I was thinking mostly of "X..Y" types of ranges, which are probably >> the most common. I hadn't considered shallow repositories, and you can >> also hit the root commit as a boundary if you do not specify --root. >> >> I guess the question still in my mind is: what use does the identity of >> the boundary commit have? That is, whether you know ahead of time where >> the boundary is or not, is there ever a case where knowing its author >> and/or commit sha1 is a useful piece of information, as opposed to >> knowing that we hit a boundary at all? >> >> I could not think of one, but I may simply lack imagination. > > Well, the original message was triggered by the same "I could not > think of one" from me ;-). If it's the root commit, omitting all info may surprisingly make "who should I yell at" hard. I also am not sure about the implications in connection with --reverse. In connection with explicit -b however, I think it is nonsensical to blank out only the commit id. -- David Kastrup