Re: [problem with name-rev]

From: Uwe Brauer <oub@mat.ucm.es>
Date: Aug 21, 2019, 07:50 UTC
Message-ID: <87pnkz2bzy.fsf@mat.ucm.es>
In-Reply-To: <CABURp0qHnzpwr8dPtPZpA+1C=tEsoybh2V00iHpyrJ2AM8XHzQ@mail.gmail.com>

   > On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 12:35 PM Uwe Brauer <oub@mat.ucm.es> wrote:

   > Try adding '--all' to include all refs, not just the current HEAD, to
   > begin logging from. Here is what I see after running your setup
   > script.

   > $  git log --graph --decorate --all
   > * commit 3262040f2d8d5f31b4918bda9987e6b5f788531f (foo)
   > | Author: Phil Hord <phord@purestorage.com>
   > | Date:   Tue Aug 20 12:44:32 2019
   > |
   > |     1.2.1
   > |
   > * commit fc66c4311bf954d455f468581f2913dffa0f9c2b
   > | Author: Phil Hord <phord@purestorage.com>
   > | Date:   Tue Aug 20 12:44:32 2019
   > |
   > |     1.2
   > |
   > | * commit 109e5d4baef4e99cf636189ba1499af817ab0bb1 (HEAD -> master)
   > |/  Author: Phil Hord <phord@purestorage.com>
   > |   Date:   Tue Aug 20 12:44:32 2019
   > |
   > |       1.1
   > |
   > * commit 5c1e93ed7c5b3b241d5adfadb365a6bca5d60d3a
   >   Author: Phil Hord <phord@purestorage.com>
   >   Date:   Tue Aug 20 12:44:32 2019

   >       1

That's it, thanks. Interestingly enough the

 git graph looks differently from the mercurial one.

The mercurial one looks purely linear (with two branches) while the git one is not, but maybe it is not clear to me who to translate the git command

git checkout -b foo master~1

To mercurial?

Anyhow the original question was about having a sort of local revision number and I see that this is somehow possible, which was not clear to me before.

Thanks