On Thu, Apr 09, 2020 at 01:20:57PM -0400, Derrick Stolee wrote: > In conclusion, I think "--show-pulls" provides the right context for these > extra merges to show in the history view. It also roots these merges in a > Git-native name (that also happens to evoke the "pull request" concept that > is _not_ native to Git). > > What do you think? Yeah, after reading more of the thread, I think the simplest way to think about is "keep merges that pulled in something" with the implication of "(even if the other side didn't touch anything)". And "something you pulled" is a sensible way to think of that. So --show-pulls makes sense to me. Or if we really want to tie it in to simplification, --no-simplify-pulls. But that's more awkward to type, and none of the existing simplification options use the word simplify. ;) -Peff
