(Ping for Mike)
Yesterday, Robby Findler wrote:
> that is off on its own side path. Ie my graph looks like this:
>
> o improve canvas drawing docs
> |
> o Merge remote branch origin (committer Sperber)
> /|
> / |
> | o
> | |
> | 73 commits (why 73?!)
> | |
> | o like f57b431c2e6466c (missed other case)
> * |
> \ |
> \|
> o New Racket version 5.0.99.6
>
> where the * is the commit mentioned above.
What you see here is the result of Mike pushing a commit without
rebasing it, getting a merge instead. Specifically, it looks like
Mike had his repo at the 5.0.99.6 commit, he then commited something,
merged (not rebased) which added the 73 commits and created a merge
commit that ties the knot at the top.
What gitk etc are doing is some kind of a sort that is supposed to
make things look better, but IME, this can be confusing (perhaps since
I'm usually aware of the timeline). You can use a `-d' argument to
gitk to make it sort things by date, which will show things in the
order they were made. You can also use the log command -- compare the
output of these two things side-by-side:
git log --pretty=oneline --graph
git log --pretty=oneline --graph --date-order
(Mike: it would really be better to rebase, and avoid such unnecessary
confusions.)
--
((lambda (x) (x x)) (lambda (x) (x x))) Eli Barzilay:
http://barzilay.org/ Maze is Life!
_________________________________________________
For list-related administrative tasks:
http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/dev
