Hi, On Mon, 12 Jun 2006, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Tue, 13 Jun 2006, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > > > > On Mon, 12 Jun 2006, Fredrik Kuivinen wrote: > > > > > git-blame is a bit faster than git-annotate and, as far as I know, it > > > produces output which is correct. > > > > Yeah: Bring It On(tm)! I already waited for ages for this war to begin! > > Sadly, I don't think either of you can really do much about the fact that > annotate/blame is simply the wrong model for git. > > The war _I_d like to see is the GUI thing which does the "show when this > section changed last" by following the history down only so far that the > selected section shows up in the diff against the most current thing. But this is just the next step! Nothing prevents you -- once everybody agrees that blame/annotate does the right thing -- to restrict the lines of interest. And AFAICT both blame and annotate are good at stopping when all lines are accounted for. Ciao, Dscho - : send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html