Hi Thomas, On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 03:17:41PM +0200, Thomas Rast wrote: > Jens Lehmann <jens.lehm...@web.de> writes: > > > Am 29.07.2013 21:37, schrieb Thomas Rast: > >> Thomas Rast <tr...@inf.ethz.ch> writes: > >> > >>> Thomas Rast <tr...@inf.ethz.ch> writes: > >>> > >>>> Now that git log -L has hit master, I figure it's time to discuss the > >>>> corresponding change to gitk. > >>> > >>> Paul, any news on this? Any chance we can get it into the next release, > >>> since that will also be the first release to ship with 'git log -L'? > >> > >> Jens pointed out privately that the handling of unstuck -L options is > >> unfortunate, to put it mildly. I'll send a reroll. > > > > But as soon as that is fixed I'd really like to see this applied, as > > I think gitk is the perfect tool to show history information.
One thing I worry about is having gitk storing in memory not just the history graph but also all the diffs (assuming I have understood correctly what you're doing). Gitk's memory consumption is already pretty large. However, I can't see an alternative at this point. > Unfortunately it's turning out to be harder than I hoped. gitk runs the > arguments through git-rev-parse, which only knows that -n gets an > unstuck argument. Consequently, gitk accepts an unstuck -n but only > stuck forms of -S and -G. Excuse my ignorance, but what do you mean by "stuck" vs. "unstuck"? Thanks, Paul. -- 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
