On Wed, Mar 02, 2011 at 06:51:57PM +0100, Piotr Krukowiecki wrote: > On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 6:16 PM, Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > I considered making it a special mode of "git blame" when blame is fed a > > directory instead of a file. But the implementations aren't shared at > > all (nor do I think they need to be; blame-tree is _way_ simpler). And I > > git blame dir/file.c > "Show what revision and author last modified each line of a file" > > git blame dir/ > "Show what revision and author last modified each file" Right, I think we are agreeing. > This makes sense to me (the user). I don't understand the > implementation thing. I don't see a difference between those two > commands. Even more, if I'm educated Unix user I might know > directories are also files. I mean the implementations are very different, so there was not much point in putting the code into builtin/blame.c. > > didn't want to steal that concept in case somebody can think of a more > > content-level way of blaming a whole tree that makes sense (obviously > > just showing the concatenation of the blames of each file is one way, > > but I don't know how useful that would be). If we want to go that way, > > we can always catch the special case in blame and just exec blame-tree. > > Still can be in git-blame command, no? Right. What I meant was that we don't have to make the decision now. If people like blame-tree, we can later magically turn: git blame dir into "git blame-tree dir". So I think we are just agreeing. > > The initial set of interesting files we come up with is gotten by > > looking at the tree of the first pending object after parsing the rev > > options (defaulting to HEAD). Which sounds a little flaky to me, but > > does what you want in practice. I'd be curious if somebody can come up > > with a counterexample where the ability to manually specify the source > > tree would be more useful. > > Same argument as for normal blame: I want to know who modified files at > the state of commit X (if I understand the question correctly). Yeah, that's what it does now. Specifically I was wondering about more elaborate examples, like: git blame-tree dir branch1 branch2 It will traverse using both branch1 and branch2, but get the initial list of files from branch1. I guess we could also union those trees or something. But I expect most calls to be: git blame-tree dir commit and that's it. -Peff -- 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