Re: a few remaining issues...

From: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Date: Jan 9, 2007, 23:53 UTC
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.63.0701100051350.22628@wbgn013.biozentrum.uni-wuerzburg.de>
In-Reply-To: <7vtzz0j6hf.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>

Hi,

On Tue, 9 Jan 2007, Junio C Hamano wrote:

Show 14 quoted lines

> Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> writes:
> 
> > On Fri, 5 Jan 2007, Shawn O. Pearce wrote:
> >
> >> I myself am also severly lacking in time right now.
> >
> > Did you have any chance to look at the patch I posted? It adds 
> > "--walk-reflogs" option to the revision walker, and as long as there is 
> > reflog information, traverses the commits in that order. It also shows the 
> > reflog data just below the "commit" line.
> 
> What does it do when you say, for example:
> 
> 	git log --walk-reflogs master..next

It means that (ideally) all revisions are shown which are in the reflog chain of next, and _not_ in the reflog chain of master.

However, once the reflog traversal hits the oldest reflog entry, it reverts to commit parent traversal.

> I couldn't make heads or tails out of the patch and did not understand 
> what it was trying to do.  It looked as if you were making the log 
> traversal machinery to walk _both_ reflog (probably from the latest to 
> older) and the usual ancestry.

Yes, first reflog, then usual ancestry.

Would you want that changed to _only_ reflog traversal?

Ciao, Dscho