Re: What's in git.git (stable)

Jakub Narebski [off-list ref] writes:

Theodore Tso wrote:

quoted

On Sun, Feb 04, 2007 at 11:12:34AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:

quoted

On Sun, 4 Feb 2007, Jeff King wrote:

quoted

Just a thought, but it might be useful to blame the contents of an
arbitrary file (but starting the history at a given pathname). Something
like "git blame --contents /tmp/foo.c file.c", with contents defaulting
to "file.c". There's much discussion of editor interfaces, and this
leaves the possibility of git-blaming the contents of the editor buffer
(after writing it out to a temp file) without having to save changes to
the working tree file.

I agree, that probably would make most sense. If we do this at all. On the 
other hand, I suspect that most editors would probably want to pipe the 
contents to the program, not write it to a temp-file.

... and use it with --incremental, as well.  In emacs you can have the
annotation take place as it is being written out relatively easily, by
arranging to have a callback function get called each time more
information is handed back to emacs via a pipe.

So perhaps instead of "git blame --contents /tmp/foo.c file.c" we should
have "cat /tmp/foo.c | git blame --stdin file.c", hmmm? Editor would then
pipe current contents of the buffer to "git blame --stdin --incremental
file.c" (where file.c is the name in tree/in HEAD).

But if we allow the standard convention of using - to mean stdin, the
--contents option would be more flexible, since "--contents -" would
just be a special case.

-- 
David Kågedal