threads / discuss / 28912

feature request: git annotate -w like git blame -w

Subject: feature request: git annotate -w like git blame -w

## tl;dr

4 messages between Nov 11, 2011 and Nov 14, 2011.

replies: 3people: 3as markdown or json

Raoul Bhatia [IPAX]· Nov 11, 2011, 13:02 UTC · lore
hi!
is it possible to add a "git annotate -w" option like git blame has?

thanks, raoul ps. please reply to me in cc as i'm not subscribed to this list.

-- 
____________________________________________________________________
DI (FH) Raoul Bhatia M.Sc.          email.          r.bhatia@ipax.at
Technischer Leiter

IPAX - Aloy Bhatia Hava OG          web.          http://www.ipax.at
Barawitzkagasse 10/2/2/11           email.            office@ipax.at
1190 Wien                           tel.               +43 1 3670030
FN 277995t HG Wien                  fax.            +43 1 3670030 15
____________________________________________________________________
Jakub Narebski· Nov 11, 2011, 13:57 UTC · re: Raoul Bhatia [IPAX] · lore

Re: feature request: git annotate -w like git blame -w

"Raoul Bhatia [IPAX]" <r.bhatia@ipax.at> writes:
> is it possible to add a "git annotate -w" option like git blame has?

Why not use "git blame -c -w"? `-c' turns on annotate-compatibile output.

From git-annotate(1) manpage:
   The only difference between this command and git-blame(1) is that they  use
   slightly  different  output formats, and this command exists only for back-
   ward compatibility to support existing scripts, and provide a more familiar
   command name for people coming from other SCM systems.
 
> ps. please reply to me in cc as i'm not subscribed to this list.
This is usual behavior on this list.
-- 
Jakub Narębski
Raoul Bhatia [IPAX]· Nov 14, 2011, 16:21 UTC · re: Jakub Narebski · lore

Re: feature request: git annotate -w like git blame -w

On 2011-11-11 14:57, Jakub Narebski wrote:
Show 13 quoted lines
> "Raoul Bhatia [IPAX]"<r.bhatia@ipax.at>  writes:
>
>> is it possible to add a "git annotate -w" option like git blame has?
>
> Why not use "git blame -c -w"?  `-c' turns on annotate-compatibile
> output.
>
>  From git-annotate(1) manpage:
>
>     The only difference between this command and git-blame(1) is that they  use
>     slightly  different  output formats, and this command exists only for back-
>     ward compatibility to support existing scripts, and provide a more familiar
>     command name for people coming from other SCM systems.

thanks for this clarification. somehow, i missed this part while scanning the man pages.

thank you and sorry for the noise! raoul

-- 
____________________________________________________________________
DI (FH) Raoul Bhatia M.Sc.          email.          r.bhatia@ipax.at
Technischer Leiter

IPAX - Aloy Bhatia Hava OG          web.          http://www.ipax.at
Barawitzkagasse 10/2/2/11           email.            office@ipax.at
1190 Wien                           tel.               +43 1 3670030
FN 277995t HG Wien                  fax.            +43 1 3670030 15
____________________________________________________________________
Junio C Hamano· Nov 14, 2011, 20:49 UTC · re: Jakub Narebski · lore

Re: feature request: git annotate -w like git blame -w

Jakub Narebski <jnareb@gmail.com> writes:
Show 13 quoted lines
> "Raoul Bhatia [IPAX]" <r.bhatia@ipax.at> writes:
>
>> is it possible to add a "git annotate -w" option like git blame has?
>
> Why not use "git blame -c -w"?  `-c' turns on annotate-compatibile
> output.
>
> From git-annotate(1) manpage:
>
>    The only difference between this command and git-blame(1) is that they  use
>    slightly  different  output formats, and this command exists only for back-
>    ward compatibility to support existing scripts, and provide a more familiar
>    command name for people coming from other SCM systems.

Somebody may want to compare git-blame.txt and git-annotate.txt in Documentation/, notice that they share blame-options.txt and that the former has accumulated option descriptions for a few more options that should have been placed in blame-options.txt, and then prepare a patch to improve the documentation? Hint, hint...

I *think* '-c', '-f', and '-n' are blame-only options but all others would work with annotate (whoever is doing the patch needs to verify this, though).

← back to recent threads