From: Jakub Narebski <jnareb@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2006 00:19:15 GMT
Subject: Re: [RFC] git-split: Split the history of a git repository by subdirectories and ranges
Message-ID: <ehmah3$rkj$2@sea.gmane.org>
In-Reply-To: <7vu01tfe6u.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>

Junio C Hamano wrote:

> So one potential action item that came out from this discussion
> for me is to either modify --pretty=raw (or add --pretty=rawish)
> that gives the rewritten parents instead of real parents?  With
> that, you can drop the code to simplify ancestry by hand in your
> loop, and also you do not have to do the grafts inforamation
> yourself either?
> 
> If that is the case I'd be very happy.
> 
> The only thing left for us to decide is if reporting the true
> parenthood like the current --pretty=raw makes sense (if so we
> need to keep it and introduce --pretty=rawfish).
> 
> The only in-tree user of --pretty=raw seems to be git-svn but it
> only looks at path-unlimited log/rev-list from one given commit,
> so the only difference between dumping what is recorded in the
> commit object and listing what parents we _think_ the commit has
> is what we read from grafts.  I think we are safe to just "fix"
> the behaviour of --pretty=raw
> 
> Comments?

The name --pretty=raw suggest output of info directly from commit object,
but perhaps that just me (--pretty=rawish or ==pretty=headers).

-- 
Jakub Narebski
Warsaw, Poland
ShadeHawk on #git