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

Jeff King [off-list ref] writes:

On Fri, May 09, 2014 at 07:04:05AM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:

quoted

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.

Well, the original message was triggered by the same "I could not
think of one" from me ;-).

We may want to flip the default to do a more sanitised version of "-b"
that has been suggested earlier:

             (                                         103) 
    7bbc458b (Kyle J. McKay  2014-04-22 04:16:22 -0700 104) test_expect_...
             (                                         105)         test...
    7bbc458b (Kyle J. McKay  2014-04-22 04:16:22 -0700 106)         git ...
             (                                         107)         test...

which does away with the misleading information altogether.

and have another option to show the current default output for those
who would want that information.

But that will be a topic for post 2.0; I should start preparing for
the -rc3 soonish, so I'll stop here.