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

5 messages, 3 authors, 2016-06-15 · open the first message on its own page

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

From: Junio C Hamano <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-15 22:56:56

Ramkumar Ramachandra [off-list ref] writes:
... and what about 'git log HEAD^!'?  Is that a range?  
Of course it _is_ a range; didn't you read it in the "specifying
ranges" section?  It is a short-hand for "include HEAD, exclude its
parents", and you can further combine it with other starting points.
What about 'git log HEAD:README' (hint: it doesn't error out)?
Sounds like a bug, if it doesn't.

Patches welcome---I suspect that it can be solved the same way as
the recent cherry-pick patch by Miklos.
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.
That is why I said this is "git log", not "git show".

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

From: Ramkumar Ramachandra <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-15 22:56:56

Junio C Hamano wrote:
Sounds like a bug, if it doesn't.

Patches welcome---I suspect that it can be solved the same way as
the recent cherry-pick patch by Miklos.
It's not as pressing as the glaring Documentation inaccuracies, so
I'll queue the task.

To exclude this case, I would say the most technically accurate
description of what 'git log' takes is a "committish range" (basically
a "revision range" that resolves to commits).

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

From: Jonathan Nieder <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-15 22:56:56

Ramkumar Ramachandra wrote:
                      I would say the most technically accurate
description of what 'git log' takes is a "committish range" (basically
a "revision range" that resolves to commits).
What is a revision range that doesn't resolve to commits?  Am I wrong
in thinking revision is nothing more than a synonym for commit?

When gitrevisions(7) says "A revision parameter <rev> typically, but
not necessarily, names a commit object", I suspect it is residue from
3a45f625 trying to apologize for the extended SHA1 syntax parser being
called "git rev-parse" instead of "git object-name-parse".

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

From: Ramkumar Ramachandra <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-15 22:56:56

Jonathan Nieder wrote:
Am I wrong
in thinking revision is nothing more than a synonym for commit?
Yes.  If master@{3}~2:README isn't a revision, what is it?  And it
fits into the Specifying Revisions section quite snugly: I see no
reason to mangle the meaning of "revision".

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

From: Jonathan Nieder <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-15 22:56:56

Ramkumar Ramachandra wrote:
Yes.  If master@{3}~2:README isn't a revision, what is it?
An extended SHA1 expression referring to a blob.
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help