On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 4:05 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Martin von Zweigbergk <martin.von.zweigbergk@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
>>> diff --git a/Documentation/rev-list-options.txt b/Documentation/rev-list-options.txt
>>> index 6a4b635..dc501ee 100644
>>> --- a/Documentation/rev-list-options.txt
>>> +++ b/Documentation/rev-list-options.txt
>>> @@ -579,15 +579,32 @@ Commit Ordering
>>> By default, the commits are shown in reverse chronological order.
>>
>> It seems likely that those reading the above sentence will continue on
>> to read about --topo-order, but still, do you think the "descendant
>> commits are shown before parents" part belong here instead?
>
> I do not think so. When you are not limited (i.e. limit_list() is
> not called), you could do something like "git rev-list 4 5" in a
> history like this:
>
> --1---5---2---3---4
>
> and get end up getting "5 4 3 2 1", and "2" certainly doesn't get
> shown before "5" does.
Oh, interesting. I had no idea, although that does make sense. Thanks.
Still, the "Even without this option" strongly suggests to me that
what follows ("descendant commits are shown before parents") applies
to the "By default" case. Would it be correct to say something like
"By default, the commits are shown in reverse chronological order.
When commit limiting is in effect, descendant commits are shown before
parents."? I'm not sure the "commit limiting" section in the man page
involves the same options as "limit_list" (I rather think they don't),
but I don't know if there's a better term to use in the documentation
either.
--
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