On 12/05/2013 19:58, John Keeping wrote:
With the patch below, the --ancestry-path version drops to under 2 seconds. I'm not sure if this is a good idea though. It helps me say "I know nothing that isn't on the ancestry path can be patch-identical, so don't bother checking if it is" but it regresses users who want the full cherry-pick check while only limiting the output.
Hmm. Should an excluded commit be a valid comparator? Is it sensible/correct to show a left commit as "=" to a right commit that has been excluded by the revision specifiers? Doesn't sound right to me.
I'm not convinced that there's a valid use-case that you're regressing here. If --ancestry-path is being misused (the user's assertion that non-ancestry doesn't matter is wrong) the "error" of not noting culled patch-identical commits is nothing compared to the fact we're already totally omitting the non-identical ones.
Kevin -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
