Tejun Heo <tj@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > ... After all, calling the program twice isn't all that > difficult. As long as we all agree on that, I think we can move forward. Because I think this ... >> ... But it feels like >> "reverse-map the cherry-picks" is orthogonal to the idea of name-rev. ... is a better way of saying what I've been feeling (i.e. the feature indeed is useful, but does it belong to "name-rev"?), and none among three of us would mind running "name-rev" to see the simplest way to reach the primary commit you are interested in from tags, and another "reverse-map the cherry-picks" command (and in "git show -s --notes=reverse-cherry-pick" may be that command) to get the data from that orthogonal feature. And obviously, "git log --notes=reverse-cherry-pick" would give the information if we take that "use notes to record reverse map for cherry-picks" route; adding support for "name-rev --cherry-pick" would not help such a use case.
