Re: [PATCH 4/5] git-log.txt: rewrite note on why "--" may be required

Ramkumar Ramachandra [off-list ref] writes:

Junio C Hamano wrote:

quoted

I think "branch names" was an attempt to make it more newbie
friendly by sacrificing technical accuracy.  With the suggested
update (see the review for the previous one), it would be easier to
read if this part said "options or the revision range".

Why does it have to be a range? It might well be a list of revisions,

Study "Specifying Ranges" section of gitrevisions and come back,
perhaps?

A list of revisions is merely a way to specify "revision range" that
are reachable from any of these revisions listed.  "log A B" won't
stop by just showing A and B (that would be "show A B"), but will
list those that are reachable from A B, so in the context of
discussing the arguments given to "git log" command, "A B" is still
"revision range".

Junio C Hamano wrote:

A list of revisions is merely a way to specify "revision range" that
are reachable from any of these revisions listed.  "log A B" won't
stop by just showing A and B (that would be "show A B"), but will
list those that are reachable from A B, so in the context of
discussing the arguments given to "git log" command, "A B" is still
"revision range".

... and what about 'git log HEAD^!'?  Is that a range?  What about
'git log HEAD:README' (hint: it doesn't error out)? I would argue that
"A B" is not inherently a revision range, but rather two revisions.
It's upto different commands to interpret it differently.

Then again, in the context of log, we just want ranges (also
considering we had <since>..<until> for this long, and I didn't even
object to it).  So I'll go with your "revision range", but I won't
claim that it's technically accurate.