On Mon, 21 Jul 2008, Tim Harper wrote: > > Anyone run into this before? Any idea what might have caused it? We're a bit > concerned about this because if we don't know how to avoid this, we no longer > can feel certain that when something is committed, it will make it out in our > release. Read up on '--full-history'. By default, git simplifies the history for logs that have path simplification: only walking down the side of a merge that all the data came from (ie the unchanged side). So it only leaves merges around if there was changes from _all_ parents. So without --full-history, if any parent matches the state, it just removes the merge and picks that parent that contained all the state. Obviously, any changes to that file can be sufficiently explained by walking just that limited history, because they must have changed in _that_ history too! That default behaviour leads to a *much* simpler history, and is usually what you want - it avoids unnecessary duplication when something was changed trivially the same way in both branches - 'git log' will just pick the first branch. So, if you had two (or more) commits that both fixed the same bug in different branches, and thus both branches actually ended up with the same contents, it does mean that "git log <filename>" will only show _one_ of the fixes. In this case, it apparently showed another version than the one you were looking for. Linus -- 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
