Re: [PATCH RFC 0/5] Introduce git-blame-tree(1) command

From: Marc Branchaud <marcnarc@xiplink.com>
Date: May 15, 2025, 17:39 UTC
Message-ID: <a97db895-5121-427a-b64f-df225309f429@xiplink.com>
In-Reply-To: <xmqqa57d3k1d.fsf@gitster.g>

On 2025-05-15 12:39, Junio C Hamano wrote:

Show 9 quoted lines

> Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im> writes:
> 
>> Curious. Isn't it exactly the same what git-blame(1) does though? Taken
>> the textual representation of a tree object, we figure out when each of
>> the lines has last been changed. That to me sounds like exactly the same
>> thing as git-blame(1), but just for trees instead of for blobs.
> 
> That's mechanical worldview from the viewpoint of those who know the
> internal representation and workings of Git, I would have to say.

I interpreted Patrick's statement in the exact opposite way! I thought he was speaking as a normal Git user, who is just considering the semantics of the outputs: both are fundamentally just lines of a Something (a file or a directory listing), each prefixed by a commit ID.

> As an end-user, I view "where does the body of this function came
> from" and "when did I touch this file the last time" quite different
> and unrelated kind of queries.

I can see them either way, depending on how I squint. I have no objection if people want to think of this new operation as something-that-is-not-a-blame. But then don't call it blame-tree!

How about last-touch?

M.