From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 365DFC433ED for ; Thu, 6 May 2021 20:29:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F2A2F61289 for ; Thu, 6 May 2021 20:29:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S232895AbhEFUad (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 May 2021 16:30:33 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com ([64.147.108.71]:50342 "EHLO pb-smtp2.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229951AbhEFUac (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 May 2021 16:30:32 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CFE5CA9CC9; Thu, 6 May 2021 16:29:33 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=1Q2jy+Tka8MJMo2/rhbXyPJP+lhwx+b1VXQG1f CBwoM=; b=FRNZ1TUS/eAIlOj3kV16OnRqgwZDq5E/ab4GSHH3EiZR32V3dM09r6 8FTipBbxJ0p37FjDXFRnslPIsd+UEup+TNLOuAEQkRzKgnS6P1In+ZKSs/yoN8yE dOJckb5zOI4+9+i8l3s/TcXHnEGFl6Lhq4BCTsmSoHyg5WAk3Si7g= Received: from pb-smtp2.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C7CCDA9CC8; Thu, 6 May 2021 16:29:33 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.74.119.39]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 21C12A9CC7; Thu, 6 May 2021 16:29:33 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Sergey Organov Cc: Alex Henrie , Git mailing list Subject: Re: Why doesn't `git log -m` imply `-p`? References: <87im45clkp.fsf@osv.gnss.ru> <87v9837tzm.fsf@osv.gnss.ru> <87czu7u32v.fsf@osv.gnss.ru> <87eeemhnj4.fsf@osv.gnss.ru> <87r1imbmzz.fsf@osv.gnss.ru> <87tunh9tye.fsf@osv.gnss.ru> <87wnscuif9.fsf@osv.gnss.ru> Date: Fri, 07 May 2021 05:29:32 +0900 In-Reply-To: <87wnscuif9.fsf@osv.gnss.ru> (Sergey Organov's message of "Thu, 06 May 2021 15:59:38 +0300") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: C454EFF2-AEA9-11EB-B9AA-74DE23BA3BAF-77302942!pb-smtp2.pobox.com Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Sergey Organov writes: > It's nice we've reached mutual understanding! Yes, and thanks for correcting me. > The only remaining issue then is if we just go and do the change of -m > semantics, or do we need to take some backward compatibility measures? > Looks like we are rather safe to just go, as it's unlikely there will be > any real breakage. What do you think? I still wish I could come up with the usual backward compatibility transition dance for this case, but I do not think there is one. However. If "-m" were doing a more useful thing than "compare with each parent separately", people may have aliased "log -m" to something so that their "git aliased-log" and "git aliased-log -p" would work better for them than "git log" and "git log -p", but quite honestly, I do not think "git log -m -p" output is readable by humans (after all, that is why we invented -c and --cc), so the population that get hit by this incompatible change may be very tiny minority in relative terms.