On Tue, Apr 01, 2008 at 07:29:51AM +0300, Teemu Likonen wrote: > Adam's 'git graph' is a way of viewing log (in terminal environment), it > looks very similar to 'git log --pretty=oneline' and it accepts very > much the same command line options. That's why I see 'git log' being > logical place for such functionality. Adam suggested that it may be possible to abstract the graphing API so that it can be called progressively. I would love to see: git log --pretty=format:'%g %h %s' where %g would be "the graph lines for this commit." But maybe that is not workable since the graph may take multiple lines to show. > Actually, to me it would be more logical if 'git whatchanged' was 'git > log --changed' or '--verbose / -v' something. How about: git log --raw --full-history --always which is identical. Though in most cases, one would be happy with "git log --raw". I think whatchanged really only exists separately because it predates the merging of many of the revision-walking commands. -Peff -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
