Re: Inconsistencies with git log

>
>
> On Wed, 7 Nov 2007, Jon Smirl wrote:
> >
> > Then why doesn't this work?
>
> Jon, lookie here:
>
> > jonsmirl@terra:~/mpc5200b$ git log Documentation
> > all the log for Documentation....
> > jonsmirl@terra:~/mpc5200b$ cd Documentation
> > jonsmirl@terra:~/mpc5200b/Documentation$ git log Documentation
>
> Instead of the above sequence, do:
>
>         jonsmirl@terra:~/mpc5200b$ ls Documentation
>         .. all the files in Documentation ..
>         jonsmirl@terra:~/mpc5200b$ cd Documentation
>         jonsmirl@terra:~/mpc5200b/Documentation$ ls Documentation
>
> and now tell me, why doesn't that work? And can't you see how *stupid*
> your complaint is?

>
> The rule is:
>  - git log without arguments gives the whole, unabridged, and full
>    history.
>  - git log with arguments gives the *simplified* history for those
>    arguments.
>
> But the arguments - if they exist - are always relative. You want things
> like filename completion to work. Making the pathname arguments absolute
> would be horrible. Think about it: it's just much more logical to always
> be able to say "I want the log for file xyz", and you don't want that to
> be absolute, since you shouldn't care where in the tree you are.
>
> And the fact that git log gives the whole history when you don't give any
> arguments at all IN NO WAY makes it any more sensible to give "absolute"
> pathnames. The history being "whole" has nothing to do with the pathnames
> being "absolute". The two are totally independent issues.
>
>                         Linus
>