On January 14, 2019 12:46, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Barret Rhoden <brho@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > On 2019-01-10 at 14:29 Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > For instance, commit X does this: > >> > > >> > -foo(x,y); > >> > +foo(x,y,z); > >> > > >> > Then commit Y comes along to reformat it: > >> > > >> > -foo(x,y,z); > >> > +foo(x, y, z); > >> > > >> > And the history / rev-list for the file looks like: > >> > > >> > ---O---A---X---B---C---D---Y---E---F > >> > > >> > I want to ignore/skip Y and see X in the blame output. > >> > >> If you skip Y, the altered history would have "foo(x, y, z)" in E, > >> "foo(x,y,z)" in X, and "foo(x,y)" in A. If you start blaming from F, > >> you'd get E as the commit that explains the latest state. If you do > >> not skip Y, you'd get Y. I am not sure how you'd get X in either > >> case. > > > > The way to do it is ... > > Sorry, I made a too-fuzzy statement. What I meant was, that unless you are > ignoring E, I do not know why you "would want to" attribute a line "foo(x, y, > z)" that appears in F to X. Starting from X up to D (and to Y in real history, but > you are ignoring Y), the line was "foo(x,y,z)", after E, it is "foo(x, y, z)". I > didn't mean to ask how you "would show" such a result---as I do not yet > understand why you would want such a result to begin with. >From my own community, this came up also. The intent was to show everyone who touched a particular line, throughout history, not just the current one. Perhaps that is what Barret is going for. Regards, Randall
