Thomas Rast writes:
> Junio C Hamano writes:
>
>> Thomas Rast writes:
>>
>>> So the --topo-order switch *ensures* that we process commits in
>>> topological order even in the face of skewed clocks.
>>
>> Yes, I *think* that I attempted to show with the illustration.
>
> But then the new descrip
Martin von Zweigbergk writes:
> Still, the "Even without this option" strongly suggests to me that
> what follows ("descendant commits are shown before parents") applies
> to the "By default" case. Would it be correct to say something like
> "By default, the commits are shown in reverse chronolog
Junio C Hamano writes:
> Thomas Rast writes:
>
>> So the --topo-order switch *ensures* that we process commits in
>> topological order even in the face of skewed clocks.
>
> Yes, I *think* that I attempted to show with the illustration.
But then the new description is wrong. It claims that chi
Thomas Rast writes:
> So the --topo-order switch *ensures* that we process commits in
> topological order even in the face of skewed clocks.
Yes, I *think* that I attempted to show with the illustration.
> I suspect that
>
>> +their parents, but this tries to avoid showing commits on
>> +
Junio C Hamano writes:
> --topo-order::
> -
> - This option makes them appear in topological order (i.e.
> - descendant commits are shown before their parents).
> + This option makes them appear in topological order. Even
> + without this option, descendant commits are shown bef
On 08/14/2012 12:21 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
We said "--date-order" still does not violate the topology, but it
was still not clear enough.
Reword the description for both "--date-order" and "--topo-order",
and add an illustration to it.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano
Thanks for this change.
On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 4:05 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Martin von Zweigbergk writes:
>
>>> diff --git a/Documentation/rev-list-options.txt
>>> b/Documentation/rev-list-options.txt
>>> index 6a4b635..dc501ee 100644
>>> --- a/Documentation/rev-list-options.txt
>>> +++ b/Documentation/rev-list-op
Martin von Zweigbergk writes:
>> diff --git a/Documentation/rev-list-options.txt
>> b/Documentation/rev-list-options.txt
>> index 6a4b635..dc501ee 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/rev-list-options.txt
>> +++ b/Documentation/rev-list-options.txt
>> @@ -579,15 +579,32 @@ Commit Ordering
>> By defaul
On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 3:21 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> * Let's do this before I forget...; came up in discussion $gmane/203370
Thanks! That definitely confused me (and I suppose I stupidly didn't
test with a proper range).
>
> Documentation/rev-list-options.txt | 29 +++--
We said "--date-order" still does not violate the topology, but it
was still not clear enough.
Reword the description for both "--date-order" and "--topo-order",
and add an illustration to it.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano
---
* Let's do this before I forget...; came up in discussion $gmane/20
10 matches
Mail list logo
