On Sun, Jul 13, 2008 at 8:30 PM, Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@xxxxxx> wrote: > On Sun, 13 Jul 2008, Sverre Rabbelier wrote: >> On Sun, Jul 13, 2008 at 3:24 AM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > The data structure the revision traversal machinery uses does not support >> > this "path-per-commit" natively. >> >> Would it be possible to go for a slightly less complicated approach >> and instead of passing replacing the tracked file, append it? > > Maybe I miss something, but do you not have to keep track of the file > names, in order to keep track of the proper statistics? Hmm, no, this is just to get commits that touched a (set of) file(s). I use it to limit the commits I have to check when searching for reverts. > If that is the case, appending does not cut it. For the activity metric I think pretending that all files with the same name or renamed versions of those would make sense, which is what appending the new name would do. The downside is that all files with the same name get grouped together, I'm not sure which is the lesser of two evils. Leaving out information, or (possibly) including too much. -- Cheers, Sverre Rabbelier -- 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
