On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 03:24:26PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Mike Hommey writes:
>
> > (Maybe --topics should always require one rev on the command
> > line?)
>
> That sounds line a good thing to do.
>
> > - else if (all_heads + all_remotes)
> > - snarf_refs(all_heads, all_remo
Junio C Hamano writes:
> ...? I am not saying the change
> is problematic; it is just I haven't looked at this code for a long
> time that the existing machinery is already designed to tolerate
> duplicated input.
"for a long time to say that the existing code is OK or not" is what
I meant to s
Mike Hommey writes:
> (Maybe --topics should always require one rev on the command
> line?)
That sounds line a good thing to do.
> - else if (all_heads + all_remotes)
> - snarf_refs(all_heads, all_remotes);
> else {
> while (0 < ac) {
>
"git show-branch --topics ..." displays ancestry graph, only
considering commits that are in all given revs, except the first one.
"git show-branch" displays ancestry graph for all local branches.
Unfortunately, "git show-branch --topics " only prints out the rev
info for the given rev, and noth
On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 05:38:06PM +0900, Mike Hommey wrote:
> "git show-branch --topics ..." displays ancestry graph, only
> considering commits that are in all given revs, except the first one.
>
> "git show-branch" displays ancestry graph for all local branches.
>
> Unfortunately, "git show-b
"git show-branch --topics ..." displays ancestry graph, only
considering commits that are in all given revs, except the first one.
"git show-branch" displays ancestry graph for all local branches.
Unfortunately, "git show-branch --topics " only prints out the rev
info for the given rev, and noth
6 matches
Mail list logo
