On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 8:03 AM Sergey Organov <sorganov@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > > [...] > > > If we enable "some kind of diff" for "-m", I actually think that by > > default "git log -m" should be turned into "log --cc". As you told > > Alex in your response, "log -m -p" is a quite unpleasant format to > > read---it is there only because it was the only thing we had before > > we invented "-c/--cc". > > Please, no! --cc has unfortunate feature of outputting exactly nothing > for a lot of merge commits, causing even more confusion than historical > "-m -p" format. > > The best default for -m output is --diff-merges=first-parent. Everybody > is familiar with it, and it's useful. > > > But that might be outside the scope of this series. I dunno, but if > > there is no other constraints (like backward compatibility issues), > > I have a moderately strong preference to use "--cc" over "-m -p" > > from the get go for unconfigured people, rather than forcing > > everybody to configure > > I rather have strong preference for --diff-merges=first-parent. --cc is > only suitable for Git experts, and they know how to get what they want > anyway. Yep, by using --cc. Why spare yet another short option for that? > > Overall, let's rather make -m give diff to the first parent by default. > Simple. Useful. Not confusing. Honestly --diff-merges=separate is fine. Two weeks ago, when I started this discussion, I was trying to use `git log -m` and `git show -m` to find which merge commit introduced a particular change. Extremely verbose diff output would have been great for that, the confusing part was just that `git show -m` produced diff output and `git log -m` did not. Maybe what we really want is a new short option like `git log -m1` which would both enable diff output and set --diff-merges=1. But again, I don't have a strong opinion on which particular diff output is "the best", so I'm happy to leave that decision to the experts. -Alex
