Dylan Reid <dgreid@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > 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? I am already confused. If the command must return C when you say "ignore C" and C introduced a line you are interested in, then what is the point of specifying commits to be ignored? -- To unsubscribe from this list: 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