On 9/8/2022 5:13 PM, Glen Choo wrote: > "Derrick Stolee via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > >> From: Derrick Stolee <derrickstolee@xxxxxxxxxx> >> >> When a user runs 'git log', they expect a certain set of helpful >> decorations. This includes: >> >> * The HEAD ref >> * Branches (refs/heads/) >> * Stashes (refs/stash) >> * Tags (refs/tags/) >> * Remote branches (refs/remotes/) >> * Replace refs (refs/replace/ or $GIT_REPLACE_REF_BASE) >> >> Each of these namespaces was selected due to existing test cases that >> verify these namespaces appear in the decorations. In particular, >> stashes and replace refs can have custom colors from the >> color.decorate.<slot> config option. > > I _just_ noticed that refs/bisect/* isn't part of this list, but I'd > presume that users want to see those decorations (or I do, at least). > Was that an intentional omission? It was an intentional omission because the refs/bisect/* references are not part of the color.decorate.<slot> category. Looking into it further, the bisect refs look pretty ugly (especially the ones like "refs/bisect/good-<hash>"). If you would like to include these in the default filter, then I would recommend also adding a color.decorate.<slot> category for them and possibly replace the "refs/bisect" with just "bisect". Alternatively, you could take a hint from replace objects and just use an indicator like "bisect good" or "bisect bad" instead of listing the full ref name. Thanks, -Stolee
