Re: [PATCH v2 0/7] making log --first-parent imply -m

[Sergey Organov <sorganov@gmail.com>]

Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:

> On Tue, Aug 04, 2020 at 03:49:17PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
>> > I'm just
>> > raising the issue now because we'll be locked into the semantics of this
>> > option, which may not be able to express the full set of what's possible
>> > (so we'd be stuck adding another option later).
>> 
>> Yeah, but a good thing is that we won't have to worry about this
>> until much later, as long as we would just be introducing "diff
>> against no parents" and nothing else (or together with "diff against
>> all parents", which would make it easier to explain "-m").
>
> Agreed. My only question is whether the possibility of later having
> those other options might influence how we name the two options we add
> now. I think it's clear to all of us in this thread how those two easy
> options should behave, but if the intent is to eventually allow these to
> be mutually exclusive:
>
>   - no diff
>   - combined
>   - dense combined
>   - individual diff against each parent
>
> but orthogonal to the selection of the parent-set (none, all, or
> selected ones) then e.g. "all" makes less sense for "individual diff
> against each parent". I don't have a good succinct name suggestion,
> though.

I have "split" and "separate" in mind, the latter likely shortened to
"sep".

Overall:

--diff-merges=(off,none|comb|dense,dense-comb,comb-dense|sep,split)

-- Sergey