Re: multiple-commit cherry-pick?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi,

On Mon, 10 Nov 2008, Junio C Hamano wrote:

> Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@xxxxxx> writes:
> 
> Alex could also change the command to show the HEAD and HEAD~10, by 
> changing the way series of range parameters are evaluated by the 
> revision parsing machinery.  You take HEAD^..HEAD and come up with one 
> set (that has only one commit, HEAD), you take the next parameter 
> HEAD~10 and come up with another set (that also has only one commit, 
> HEAD~10, because show does not walk), then you take union.
> 
> I personally do not want to see that happen, though.  The way multiple
> "ranges" that come from separate command line parameters combine using set
> operator semantics is so useful to do something like...
> 
> 	git log ko/master..master ^maint
> 
> which is my way to ask "Which commits on master are the ones that I
> haven't pushed out?

Exactly one of my use cases, since we do not have ko/master,maint..master.

Ciao,
Dscho
--
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

[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]

  Powered by Linux