On Tue, 10 Jan 2023 at 13:18, Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 10, 2023 at 11:54:16AM +0100, Martin Ågren wrote: > > > I suppose it could be argued that the '-' should be applied to the > > fallback as well, e.g., to uphold some sort of "using '-' should give > > the same result as piping the whole thing through tac" (i.e., respecting > > `s->reverse` in `compare_refs()`, if you're following along in > > 7c5045fc18). With multiple sort keys, some with '-' and some > > without, we'd grab the '-' from the first key. It seems like that could > > make sense, actually. > > I dunno. Just because you are reverse-sorting on one field doesn't > necessarily imply that you want the tie-breaker to reverse-sort, too. I [...] > I could see it depending on exactly what you're trying to do. Which > leads me to think the rule should be as simple as possible. You can > always do: > > git for-each-ref --sort=-refname --sort=-committerdate > > to specify exactly what you want. Indeed. So probably best to leave it as-is, then. Martin
