Josh Triplett <josh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > Junio C Hamano wrote: > >> 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 > > I actually think I want to look further into the idea of just using git > --pretty=raw --parents -- $project, and see if I can find any corner cases > where it generates a different history than what we want. I do not mind _coding_ the --pretty=rawfish change if needed but I do not think it is necessary, which is pretty good news. After I wrote the message I realized that I probably do not have to do anything, since --parents would give you the rewritten parents already anyway. - 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