I have this in effect: alias gitlog='git log --graph --full-history --all --color --pretty=format:"%x1b[31m%h%x09%x1b[32m%d%x1b[0m%x20%s"'
I didn't come up with the incantation (and I forget the source), but it has obviated entirely my use of gitk. I use this command many times a day. Richard On Feb 1, 2016, at 11:04 AM, Ben Gamari <[email protected]> wrote: > Jan Stolarek <[email protected]> writes: > >>> If there are multiple commits then a merge commit can serve to logically >>> group them. >> The cost of this is non-linear history. But I am still not sure what the >> actual benefit is? If the >> commits come one after another they are still logically grouped, with or >> without a merge commit. >> >> I also wonder what is the preferred way of viewing history for most of the >> people. I either use >> `git log` or github, but rarely resort to gitk. Only the latter makes the >> non-linear commits >> explicitly visible. The former two just collapse everything into a linear >> history and is such a >> setting merge commits are a major clutter. So perhaps that's why I don't >> like them. Perhaps >> people who tend to use gitk are more keen on merge commits? >> > Indeed I make quite frequent use of gitk (even git log --graph is pretty > usable). > > Cheers, > > - Ben > > _______________________________________________ > ghc-devs mailing list > [email protected] > http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs _______________________________________________ ghc-devs mailing list [email protected] http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs
