Re: How to trim the fat on my log graphs

> Robert Dailey <rcdailey.lists@gmail.com> writes:
>
> [Administrivia: because people read from top to bottom / why is it
> bad to top-post? / please do not top-post.]
>
>> On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 4:37 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
>>> Robert Dailey <rcdailey.lists@gmail.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> git log log --graph --abbrev-commit --decorate --date=relative
>>>> --format=format:'%C(bold blue)%h%C(reset)%x09%C(bold
>>>> green)(%ar)%C(reset)%C(bold yellow)%d%C(reset) %C(dim
>>>> white)%an%C(reset) - %C(white)%s%C(reset)' --branches --remotes
>>>> ...
>>>> The goal is to weed out the really distant and irrelevant commits. I
>>>> really just want to see the commits that are closely related to my
>>>> current branch. Thanks in advance.
>>>
>>> For a starter, how about dropping "--branches --remotes" from that
>>> command line?  A merge from elsewhere will show as "Merge branch foo"
>>> which should be sufficient without the decoration.
>>
>> Thanks, removing those two options did help quite a bit already.
>> However, the history can still get pretty crazy. Is there a way to
>> hide all tags from the log graph? Really I just want the LABELS to be
>> hidden.
>
> As you had --decorate and a lot of %C(cruft), I was assuming that
> you do want to see all the bells and whistles when I suggested to
> omit --branches and --remotes.
>
> If you do not want --decorate, I think you can omit that from the
> command line without changing what the output means.