Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > Sergey Organov <sorganov@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > >>> Sounds very straight-forward. >>> >>> Given that "--first-parent" in "git log --first-parent -p" already >>> defeats "-m" and shows the diff against the first parent only, >>> people may find it confusing if "git log -d" does not act as a >>> shorthand for that. >> >> It doesn't, and I believe it's a good thing, as primary function of >> --first-parent is to change history traversal rules, and if -d did that, >> it would be extremely confusing. > > I am not sure about that. > >> Also, --first-parent is correctly documented as implying >> --diff-merges=first-parent, not as defeating -m. > > Yes, exactly. That makes me even more convinced that the intuitive > behaviour, when we say "we have this great short-hand option that > lets your 'git log' to do the first-parent thing with patch output", > is to do the first-parent traversal _and_ show first-parent patches. > > "-d" is documented as a short-hand for "--diff-merges=first-parent > --patch" and not for "--first-parent --patch", so the behaviour may > correctly match documentation, but that does not make the documented > behaviour an intuitive one. And a behaviour that is not intuitive > is confusing. I think both behaviors make sense, provided they are correctly documented. I just prefer the one that is more basic, yet allows to achieve things that another one does not. > >> If we read resulting documentation with a fresh eye, -d is similar to >> --cc, and -c, just producing yet another kind of output, so I think all >> this fits together quite nicely and shouldn't cause confusion. > > Another thing is that showing first-parent patch for merges while > letting the traversal also visit the second-parent chain is not as > useful an option as it could be, even though it is not so bad as the > original "-m -p" that also showed second-parent patch for merges as > well. I don't see why desire to look at diff-to-first-parent on "side" branches is any different from desire to look at them on "primary" branch, sorry, so I still don't want "-d" to affect traversal or other commit filtering rules. We do have --first-parent as well as a few others for that. > People would have to say "log --first-parent -p" to get the > first-parent traversal with first-parent patch output, and they > would not behefit from having "-d". Well, at least they can now say "log --first-parent -d" as well ;) Honestly, the "log --first-parent -p" (without "-m") suddenly producing diffs for merge commits is already unnatural, needs yet another special-casing in documentation, and then, finally, this relatively new behavior was introduced exactly because there were no "-d" at that time, to save typing "-m". The latter is yet another example of why "-d" in its current form is a good idea. That said, if you feel like there is place for a short-cut for this particular use-case, it'd be fine with me, say: --fpd: short-cut for "--first-parent -d" would fit quite nicely into the picture, I think. Thanks, -- Sergey Organov
