Re: [PATCH] graph API: fix bug in graph_is_interesting()

From: Santi Béjar <santi@agolina.net>
Date: Aug 21, 2009, 15:39 UTC
Message-ID: <adf1fd3d0908210839s35da944co4ba4079f6216b44c@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20090819023433.GP8147@facebook.com>

On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 4:34 AM, Adam Simpkins<simpkins@facebook.com> wrote:

Show 17 quoted lines

> Previously, graph_is_interesting() did not behave quite the same way as
> the code in get_revision().  As a result, it would sometimes think
> commits were uninteresting, even though get_revision() would return
> them.  This resulted in incorrect lines in the graph output.
>
> This change creates a get_commit_action() function, which
> graph_is_interesting() and simplify_commit() both now use to determine
> if a commit will be shown.  It is identical to the old simplify_commit()
> behavior, except that it never calls rewrite_parents().
>
> This problem was reported by Santi Béjar.  The following command
> would exhibit the problem before, but now works correctly:
>
>  git log --graph --simplify-by-decoration --oneline v1.6.3.3
>
> Previously git graph did not display the output for this command
> correctly between f29ac4f and 66996ec, among other places.

Thanks, the fix works (no comments about the code, only the behavior).

One more thing Junio. In 99af022 (graph API: fix bug in graph_is_interesting(), 2009-08-18) in 'pu' my name is mispelled, it seems it was interpreted as latin1, then recoded as UTF8, interpreted as latin and recoded to latin1, or in other words the é is 4 bytes instead of two. I've checked this mail and it is latin1, correctly specified in the headers.

Thanks, Santi