Matthieu Moy [off-list ref] writes:
So activating --follow for all "git log" calls would prevent log from
being used with several pathspecs.
Or, do you have a preparation patch that allows --follow with multiple
pathspecs? ;-)
In any case, you have to test "git log -- path1 path2" with the option
activated.
Or more commonly, just "git log" with no pathspec.
I also think that it is a bad idea to force "log --follow" to people
before it is made into a true feature; as it stands, it is merely a
"checkbox" item. It has too severe limitation to be used seriously
in real projects, unless your history is completely linear.
cf.
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/269357/focus=269433
On Wed, 2015-07-01 at 14:19 -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Matthieu Moy [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
So activating --follow for all "git log" calls would prevent log from
being used with several pathspecs.
Or, do you have a preparation patch that allows --follow with multiple
pathspecs? ;-)
In any case, you have to test "git log -- path1 path2" with the option
activated.
Or more commonly, just "git log" with no pathspec.
I also think that it is a bad idea to force "log --follow" to people
before it is made into a true feature; as it stands, it is merely a
"checkbox" item. It has too severe limitation to be used seriously
in real projects, unless your history is completely linear.
cf.
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/269357/focus=269433
Thanks.
Twitter's history is almost completely linear, so it's useful for us.
Since it looks like the patch won't be useful outside of our context,
I'll just rewrite it to check the pathspec count, and not upstream it
until follow becomes more general.