Re: [PATCH] blame: can specify shas of commits to ignore on command line

From: Dylan Reid <dgreid@gmail.com>
Date: May 4, 2010, 21:46 UTC
Message-ID: <j2sfd211a421005041446ub9c2247ai484c2473df856b31@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <4BE0918C.9090204@lsrfire.ath.cx>

Thanks for the speedy reply.

> Only the long option --ignore-commit works with your patch, -I doesn't.
>

Correct. I took that out because I didn't want to use "-I' which could eventually be used by a more commonly used feature. Do you agree or do you think it is worth using it. It's a UI decision I didn't want to make.

Show 5 quoted lines

>
> This function was moved from below, but it seems to be indented with
> three spaces instead of tabs now.  Adding a declaration without moving
> the function would avoid that and result in a smaller patch.
>

Good catch, I'll do that and re-send.

Show 10 quoted lines

>
> An ignored commit can still be blamed if there is no other commit to
> pass it on.  So e.g. the initial commit for the file could end up being
> blamed for lines that were added by later commits which are being
> ignored.  That may look confusing.
>
> Would it make sense to pass the blame to some kind of null commit, i.e.
> a special marker that says "I could tell you who is to blame for this
> line but you said you don't want to know"?
>

A null commit could work. I think the behavior should be to not ignore the commit. Meaning if you specify a commit that introduced a line of code that line of code will still be blamed on the ignored commit. Does That sound logical or is it too confusing?

Thanks,

Dylan