Re: [PATCH 1/5] Add a new option 'merges' to revision.c

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

 



Koosha Khajehmoogahi <koosha@xxxxxxxxx> writes:

>>>  	} else if (!strcmp(arg, "--merges")) {
>>> +		revs->max_parents = -1;
>>>  		revs->min_parents = 2;
>> 
>> But is this change warranted?  An existing user who is not at all
>> interested in the new --merges= option may be relying on the fact
>> that "--merges" does not affect the value of max_parents and she can
>> say "log --max-parents=2 --merges" to see only the two-way merges,
>> for example.  This change just broke her, and I do not see why it is
>> a good thing.
>
> The point is that if you have your log.merges conf option set to 'hide'
> and you use git log --merges (two mutually conflicting options),
> git will silently exit without anything to show.

That is not an excuse to break "--merges" and "--no-merges" for
existing users who do not care about setting log.merges option to
anything.

The whole point of introducing a new "--merges=show" option was so
that people can sanely countermand log.merges configuration from the
command line without breaking --merges and --no-merges, wasn't it?

--
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]