On Tue, Feb 27, 2007 at 06:45:41PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Theodore Tso <tytso@xxxxxxx> writes:
>
> > Well, the other design alternative is to make git-show take a list of
> > objects, so that
> >
> > git show v1.5.0..v1.5.0.1
> >
> > ends up displaying the same thing as
> >
> > git show `git-rev-list v1.5.0..v1.5.0.1`
> >
> > ... but I'm not really convinced that's really all that useful.
>
> I think we are better off doing "git show v1.5.0..v1.5.0.1" for
> that, but we do take multiple objects.
Not sure I understand what you mean? That:
git show v1.5.0..v1.5.0.1
should should show all the commits between v1.5.0 and v1.5.0.1, or
just print the commit corresponding to v1.5.0.1 (and the v1.5.0 is
completely meaningless?)
> > Note the use of singular. That would imply that it takes a single
> > object, and not a range of objects. Of course, if the above behavior
> > were actually shown to be useful, man pages can always be easily
> > changed. :-)
>
> I find myself running "git show --stat v1.X.Y v1.X.Y+1" every
> time I tag a new release Y+2 to find out things like:
>
> * Should I say "Git v1.5.1" or "GIT 1.5.1"?
> * Ah, I have to update GIT-VERSION-GEN, which I did, good.
But why not just type:
git show --stat v1.X.Y+1
instead? Or if you don't want the tag information, you could type:
git show --stat v1.X.Y+1^{commit}
since
git show --stat v1.5.0..v1.5.0.1
and
git show --stat v1.4.4.0..v1.5.0.1
and
git show --stat v1.0.0..v1.5.0.1
all print exactly the same thing!
Hence Linus's and my argument that as currently implemented the
".." operator to git doesn't make a lot of sense....
- Ted
-
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