Hi -
On 4/14/19 7:27 AM, Michael Platings wrote:
On Sun, 14 Apr 2019 at 11:24, Junio C Hamano wrote:
If you only enable blame.markIgnoredLines then the hash for
"unblamable" lines appears as e.g. "*3252488f5" - this doesn't seem
right to me because the commit *wasn't* ignored,
I think you mi
On Sun, 14 Apr 2019 at 11:24, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> > If you only enable blame.markIgnoredLines then the hash for
> > "unblamable" lines appears as e.g. "*3252488f5" - this doesn't seem
> > right to me because the commit *wasn't* ignored,
>
> I think you misunderstood me. I was merely suggestin
Michael Platings writes:
> If you only enable blame.markIgnoredLines then the hash for
> "unblamable" lines appears as e.g. "*3252488f5" - this doesn't seem
> right to me because the commit *wasn't* ignored,
I think you misunderstood me. I was merely suggesting to use the
approach to mark the l
On Sun, 14 Apr 2019 at 04:45, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Wouldn't this make it impossible to tell between what's done by such
> a commit that was marked to be ignored, and what's done locally only
> in the working tree, which the users have long accustomed to see
> with the ^0*$ object name? I think
Barret Rhoden writes:
> Sometimes we are unable to even guess at what commit touched a line.
> These lines are 'unblamable.' The second option,
> blame.maskIgnoredUnblamables, will zero the hash of any unblamable line.
>
> For example, say we ignore e5e8d36d04cbe:
> e5e8d36d04cbe (Barret R
When ignoring commits, the commit that is blamed might not be
responsible for the change. Users might want to know when a particular
line has a potentially inaccurate blame. Furthermore, they might never
want to see the object hash of an ignored commit.
This patch adds two config options to cont
6 matches
Mail list logo
