On 09/18/10 17:26, Stefan Haller wrote: > Ævar Arnfjör? Bjarmason <avarab@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> A---B---C topic >> / \ >> D---E---F---G---H master The question is the same though: if I hit commit B while blaming, how do > I know what topic it was a part of? For that, I need to find commit H > which will tell me, right? How do I do that? git rev-list --ancestry-path --merges --reverse B..master --format=oneline > One concern that they are raising is that in Git there doesn't seem to > be an easy way to find out on which branch a given commit was originally > made, after the branch is merged back and deleted. They consider this a > show-stopper. In Mercurial, branch information is meta data attached to > each commit, so you can easily get this information even after a branch > is closed. Don't do that, then. IOW if you know you could still need the old branch info, make an alias that doesn't actually delete the branch after merging, but moves the ref away, eg 'topic-name' -> "merged/topic-name" or just adds a "merged/topic-name" tag. Then simply checking from which "merged/*" branch/tag the offending commit is reachable would be enough. Deleting a merged branch does not do anything more than removing the reference (to 'C' in the above example), all the history stays around forever anyway... artur -- 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