Re: Output from "git blame A..B -- path" for the bottom commit is misleading

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

Re: Output from "git blame A..B -- path" for the bottom commit is misleading

From: David Kastrup <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-15 23:01:04

Jeff King [off-list ref] writes:
I'd actually be inclined to say the opposite of what Junio is saying
there: that "-b" should blank the author field as well as the commit
sha1. I'd even go so far as to say that "-b" should probably be the
default when boundary commits are in use. I cannot think of a time when
I have found the boundary information useful, and the IMHO the output
above is less confusing than what we produce now. But I admit I haven't
thought very hard on it.
Arguably if the user explicitly limited the range, he knows what he's
looking at.  Admittedly, I don't know offhand which options _will_
produce boundary commit indications: there may be some without explicit
range limitation, and we might also be talking about limiting through
shallow repos (git blame on a shallow repo is probably a bad idea in the
first place, but anyway).

-- 
David Kastrup

Re: Output from "git blame A..B -- path" for the bottom commit is misleading

From: Jeff King <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-15 23:01:05

On Fri, May 09, 2014 at 07:04:05AM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:
Arguably if the user explicitly limited the range, he knows what he's
looking at. Admittedly, I don't know offhand which options _will_
produce boundary commit indications: there may be some without explicit
range limitation, and we might also be talking about limiting through
shallow repos (git blame on a shallow repo is probably a bad idea in the
first place, but anyway).
Yes, I was thinking mostly of "X..Y" types of ranges, which are probably
the most common. I hadn't considered shallow repositories, and you can
also hit the root commit as a boundary if you do not specify --root.

I guess the question still in my mind is: what use does the identity of
the boundary commit have? That is, whether you know ahead of time where
the boundary is or not, is there ever a case where knowing its author
and/or commit sha1 is a useful piece of information, as opposed to
knowing that we hit a boundary at all?

I could not think of one, but I may simply lack imagination.

-Peff

Re: Output from "git blame A..B -- path" for the bottom commit is misleading

From: Duy Nguyen <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-15 23:01:06

On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 12:04 PM, David Kastrup [off-list ref] wrote:
Jeff King [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
I'd actually be inclined to say the opposite of what Junio is saying
there: that "-b" should blank the author field as well as the commit
sha1. I'd even go so far as to say that "-b" should probably be the
default when boundary commits are in use. I cannot think of a time when
I have found the boundary information useful, and the IMHO the output
above is less confusing than what we produce now. But I admit I haven't
thought very hard on it.
Arguably if the user explicitly limited the range, he knows what he's
looking at.  Admittedly, I don't know offhand which options _will_
produce boundary commit indications: there may be some without explicit
range limitation, and we might also be talking about limiting through
shallow repos (git blame on a shallow repo is probably a bad idea in the
first place, but anyway).
No it's not. The idea of shallow repos is to work like a normal repo
(most of the time at least). Excluding git-blame from shallow repos is
a bad idea. Luckily it's not hard to detect shallow boundaries: if a
commit has no parents and lookup_commit_graft() returns -1, then
that's it.
-- 
Duy
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help