Re: Why doesn't `git log -m` imply `-p`?

2 messages, 2 authors, 2021-05-07 · open the first message on its own page

Re: Why doesn't `git log -m` imply `-p`?

From: Sergey Organov <hidden>
Date: 2021-05-06 20:48:34

Junio C Hamano [off-list ref] writes:

F> Sergey Organov [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
It's nice we've reached mutual understanding!
Yes, and thanks for correcting me.
quoted
The only remaining issue then is if we just go and do the change of -m
semantics, or do we need to take some backward compatibility measures?
Looks like we are rather safe to just go, as it's unlikely there will be
any real breakage. What do you think?
I still wish I could come up with the usual backward compatibility
transition dance for this case, but I do not think there is one.
Fine, thanks, so I'll prepare and submit a patch.
However.

If "-m" were doing a more useful thing than "compare with each
parent separately", people may have aliased "log -m" to something so
that their "git aliased-log" and "git aliased-log -p" would work
better for them than "git log" and "git log -p", but quite honestly,
I do not think "git log -m -p" output is readable by humans (after
all, that is why we invented -c and --cc), so the population that
get hit by this incompatible change may be very tiny minority in
relative terms.
Well, honestly, I can't even come up with an alias that would break by
this change, but it's likely I'm just not creative enough :)

Thanks,
-- Sergey Organov

Re: Why doesn't `git log -m` imply `-p`?

From: Alex Henrie <hidden>
Date: 2021-05-07 01:31:17

On Thu, May 6, 2021 at 2:48 PM Sergey Organov [off-list ref] wrote:
Junio C Hamano [off-list ref] writes:

F> Sergey Organov [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
quoted
It's nice we've reached mutual understanding!
Yes, and thanks for correcting me.
quoted
The only remaining issue then is if we just go and do the change of -m
semantics, or do we need to take some backward compatibility measures?
Looks like we are rather safe to just go, as it's unlikely there will be
any real breakage. What do you think?
I still wish I could come up with the usual backward compatibility
transition dance for this case, but I do not think there is one.
Fine, thanks, so I'll prepare and submit a patch.
Thanks guys! I am so glad you were able to reach a consensus!

-Alex
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help