Hi -
On 4/15/19 5:56 PM, Christian González wrote:
Am 15.04.19 um 23:15 schrieb Thomas Gummerer:
This sounds roughly like what Barret Rhoden (added to Cc) has been
working on. I haven't followed that patch series in detail, but you
can have a look at it atthe latest iteration at
https://public-inbox.org/git/20190410162409.117264-1-brho@xxxxxxxxxx/.
As far as I can see this is an "automagic" way of creating those "blame
skips" - which can be easier in some way, but until it works "perfect"
It is prone to produce problems IMHO.
The git history is a "document" that _has_ not to be changed by design.
So if this "heuristic" produces a wrong result, it's kind of
unpredictable what was wrong.
I think it would be MUCH easier to mark chunks or whole commits as "not
important" explicitly - by using a file.
I think there's a slight misunderstanding. In the patchset that Michael
and I are working on, the user specifies whole commits explicitly. This
is usually done with a file, but can also be done from the command line
for "one-off" ignored commits. That sounds like what you want.
The heuristics come in when we try to pass blame for specific *lines*
that an ignored commit touched. We pass the blame to the parent commit,
but we also want to match the lines to a specific line in the parent
commit. That way we can find the 'right' ancestor commmit. We're not
able to always identify the 'right' commit, hence the heuristics.
Barret
