Re: [PATCH v7 0/5] git log -L, all new and shiny

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Thomas Rast <trast@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

>> Then the revision machinery looks at B.  It does the same between B
>> and A, but this time around, the diff machinery finds that, even
>> though A and B were _not_ TREESAME at the revision traversal level,
>> there is nothing to be shown after filtering with the -w option.
>> Hence no patch is shown and log message for B is not shown, either.
>
> Thanks for the great explanations.
>
> Having spent some time letting this sink in (and being busy doing other
> things), I think it's actually a good idea.  It forces us to go back and
> change it around so that the diff machinery gets a say _before_ we
> simplify history.  I think this bit will be important for log -L history
> to make sense, and it's a bug waiting to happen for the -w case.

Note that this is not limited to "diff_patch() already filters -w".

If you are running with --diff-filter=A to grab only the additions,
for example, you may want the merge simplification to know about
this filtering as well.

So it is likely that you would want to hook diffcore_std(), not just
diff_flush(), to the TREESAME machinery.  Obviously you would want
to do this only for the merge commits; there is no point doing this
for single strand of pearls where the output phase already knows how
to squelch output correctly.
--
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


[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]