From: Toon Claes Date: Tue, 02 Dec 2025 11:01:18 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] last-modified: better document how depth in handled Message-ID: <87tsy9w3k1.fsf@iotcl.com> In-Reply-To: Patrick Steinhardt writes: > Hm, that's confusing indeed. Is it possible for git-last-modified(1) to > do the "right thing" automatically? That is, given "sub/file", show when > that specific file has been last modified? Or is there a good > (non-technical) reason it behaves the way it does? You bring up a good point. In the version of git-blame-tree(1) that GitHub did share, the `--recursive` flag is enabled by default. So if you pass a file path to the command, you'll get the "right thing". But as I am pointing out in this patch, if you pass a subtree, everything in that subtree is shown too. You could argue this is the "right thing". Anyhow, in the version of git-last-modified(1) I submitted upstream, recursive is not enabled by default. My reason, at the time option --max-depth wasn't implemented yet. I submitted those changes in a separate series (these patches also originate from GitHub by the way). If those patches wouldn't land, I think always-on recursive behavior for git-last-modified(1) would be quite annoying. So long story short, as git-last-modified(1) is still marked as "EXPERIMENTAL", shall we make recursive always-on? -- Cheers, Toon