Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <ava...@gmail.com> writes: > Looking at the git-range-diff manpage though it recommends <base> <rev1> > <rev2> over <rev1>...<rev2> when the topic has been rebased, which is > usually the case for e.g. a topic that's submitted to git.git (usually > be the time feedback has been gathered & a re-submission has been made > Junio has pushed another "master"). > > So isn't "<base> <rev1> <rev2>" the right thing to use over > "<rev1>...<rev2>" for git.git use? I think so, but I'm not sure.
If <rev2> is forked from different base than where <rev1> was forked, then <base> <rev1> <rev2> would give you more sensible range. And such an update is inevitable when <rev2> must rely on new things that recently appeared on <base> since <rev1> forked from the mainline. But otherwise <rev1>...<rev2> should work just fine. > In any case, there are going to be those use-case where you should be > using "<base> <rev1> <rev2>", and a rebase will be propagated by a > force-push, so I thought it made sense that range-diff could directly > consume the output of "fetch" in that case... I am not absolutely sure if there is *more* useful interpretation that "<base> <rev1>...<rev2>" may want to mean than to serve as a synonym for "<base> <rev1> <rev2>" for those who are too lazy to type. But if there isn't, I'd say it is a reasonable synonym to want.
