On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 01:48:11PM -0500, Jeff King wrote: > > What confuses me about this behavior is that the OID is still shown on the > > repeat (and in the case of `git log --oneline` will not actually have a line > > break between two short-OIDs). I don't believe this behavior is something to > > preserve. > > I think that repeating the oid is intentional; the point is to dump how > the traversal code is hitting the endpoints, even if we do so multiple > times. > > The --oneline behavior just looks like a bug. I think --format is broken > with --show-all, too (it does not show anything!). I poked at one of the examples a little more closely. I actually think these are not repeats, but simply UNINTERESTING parents that we never needed to look at in our traversal (because we hit a point where everything was UNINTERESTING). So we are relying not on finish_commit() to have freed the buffer, but on the traversal code to have never parsed those commits in the first place. Which is doubly subtle. I think the rest of my email stands, though: we should just show the full headers for those commits. -Peff
