Kevin Bracey <ke...@bracey.fi> writes:
> On 10/09/2013 20:19, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> I am grumpy X-<.
>> It appears that we introduced a large breakage during 1.8.4 cycle to
>> the revision traversal machinery and made pathspec-limited "git log"
>> pretty much useless.
>> This command
>> $ git log v220.127.116.11..v1.8.4 -- git-cvsserver.perl
>> reports that a merge 766f0f8ef7 (which did not touch the specified
>> path at all) touches it.
>> Bisecting points at d0af663e (revision.c: Make --full-history
>> consider more merges, 2013-05-16).
> That merge appearing *with* --full-history would seem like correct
> behaviour to me. Or at least it's what I intended.
Oh, of course. "--full-history" is about showing any pointless
change, "the mainline was a lot more up-to-date and there were
changes relative to a fork based on an older baseline", so your
updated "log" should show that in the mainline git-cvsserver.perl
has been more fresh when that merge happened. But it shouldn't
appear if the user does not ask for "--full-history".
> However, your particular example occurs *without*--full-history, which
> suggests a problem.
> I note that "gitk v1.8.3^0..v1.8.4" and "git log --parents
> v1.8.3..v1.8.4" show that merge in Git 1.8.3, but not in Git 1.8.4. So
> we're going partially forwards, at least.
With the testcases demonstrating the cases your series fixed that
all look sensible, I think it is not really an option for us to
revert them; you do not have to defend it with "we are going
partially forwards" ;-).
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html