[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SCM-885?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17963529#comment-17963529
]
ASF GitHub Bot commented on SCM-885:
------------------------------------
jira-importer commented on issue #1116:
URL: https://github.com/apache/maven-scm/issues/1116#issuecomment-2964646685
**[Matthieu
Brouillard](https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=mcfoggy)**
commented
Another finding I have just made is that jgit implementation behaves as the
PR does (for the exe implementation), ie without startVersion it walks to the
root commits.
So now where is the truth? Do we consider the exe implementation as the
truth and say that the jgit one is buggy and thus provide a fix that will make
the jgit impl to behave like the git one introducing by that a "regression" or
do we consider the opposite exactly as the PR provides?
If you look at the patch attached and run it against master, then you will
see that the jgit impl passes the tck test whereas the git one does not.
So the question is now where to put the regression, in git impl or in jgit
impl?
> Extend GitChangeLogCommand by using revision only
> -------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: SCM-885
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SCM-885
> Project: Maven SCM (Moved to GitHub Issues)
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: maven-scm-provider-gitexe, maven-scm-provider-jgit
> Affects Versions: 1.9.5
> Reporter: Matthieu Brouillard
> Assignee: Michael Osipov
> Priority: Major
> Fix For: 1.10.0
>
> Attachments: scm-885-different-behavior-exe-jgit-patch.diff
>
>
> Invoking execution of a GitChangeLogCommand where only the end revision has
> been set produces a wrong out.
> +Actual result:+
> {{git whatchanged --date=iso ..END_REVISION_SHA1 -- PROJECT_PATH}}
> +Expected result:+ only the end revison SHA1 is used without the two dots
> {{git whatchanged --date=iso END_REVISION_SHA1 -- PROJECT_PATH}}
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)
