On Thu, Dec 01, 2011 at 09:28:31PM +0100, Ralf Thielow wrote: > > It's possible, but it is changing the meaning of "git log foo". With > > the current code, even if "foo" is currently a file, it will match > > "foo/bar" in a prior revision. Switching this to "--follow" will not. > > Why does it actually match both things? I think that's > maybe wrong. Because that's what the path argument to "git log" is designed to do -- limit revision traversal based on pathspecs. You can argue that the "--follow" semantics are more meaningful, but it doesn't change the fact that it is a behavior change. We have to consider not only backwards compatibility, but also the confusing-ness of an inconsistent interface where: git log foo bar will treat "foo" as a pathspec, but: git log foo will treat it as a file. > Also I can't use "git log" with another > file/folder doesn't exists but in another revision. What actually > exists is the file and that's imho the only thing that should match. You can: git log -- existed-long-ago As a syntax shortcut, you can drop the "--". However, there is some ambiguity with revision arguments, so git allows path arguments without a "--" only when they exist in the filesystem (_not_ in a particular revision). -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