On 23/05/2018 20:35, Jeff King wrote:
There's more discussion in the thread at:
https://public-inbox.org/git/[email protected]/
I haven't absorbed it all yet, but I'm adding Junio to the cc.
Just to ack that I've seen the discussion, but I can't identify the
code's reasoning at the moment. My recollection is that I accepted while
coming up with the algorithm that it might err slightly on the side of
false positives in the display - there were some merge cases I was
unable to fully distinguish whether or not the merge had lost a change
it shouldn't have done, and if I was uncertain I'd rather show it than not.
The first commit was not originally intended to alter behaviour for
anything other than --full-history, but later in the chain there was
specific consideration into tracking the path to the specified "bottom"
commit. It may be that's part of what's happening here.
Kevin
