Eric Sunshine <sunshine@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>> This leads to a problem. Say there are two connected regions, each having two
>> commits, the graph would look like this:
>>
>> * a2
>> * a1
>> * b2
>> * b1
>>
>> which may lead to a misunderstanding that these four commits belong to the same
>> timeline, i.e. b2 is a parent of a1.
>>
>> This patchset adds a separator line between each pair of connected regions to
>> clarify that they are not actually connected:
>>
>> * a2
>> * a1
>> ---
>> * b2
>> * b1
>
> This sort of information which explains why the patch may be desirable
> is not only helpful to reviewers of the submission, but will be
> helpful to future readers of the patch once it becomes part of the
> project's permanent history (assuming it is accepted). However, the
> cover letter does not become part of the project's history (it exists
> only in the mailing list). As such, please move this discussion into
> the commit message of the patch itself.
True. But because we are doing graph, shouldn't we be able to do
better? For example, you can draw the two lineage of histories
on different columns and ...
* a2
* a1
* b2
* b1
... that way, you do not need to lose one line of precious vertical
screen real estate.
