Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@xxxxxx> writes:
> How about failing if there are _uninteresting_ commits? So,
>
> git log --walk-reflogs next master
>
> still works?
That feels like a good way to deal with it. I think people may
also appreciate timestamps on Reflog headers you add to the
output.
That change makes
$ git log --walk-reflogs master..next
fatal: No reflogs found for 'master..next'
a non issue, for one thing.
Unfortunately,
$ git log --walk-reflogs ^master next
is not something I can read and make heads or tails of it. So
I'll try something smaller:
$ git log --walk-reflogs ^master jc/show-reflog
shows only three commits (the same as without --walk-reflogs),
although I have tons of rewinds and rebases. There is something
broken, or perhaps the semantics of --walk-reflogs does not
match what humans would expect when interacting with revision
limiting. This would also become an non-issue if we do not
allow negative ones.
-
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