Heyup, Dr. Gruber. On 7 April 2015 at 15:53, Michael J Gruber <g...@drmicha.warpmail.net> wrote: > I'm wondering what the difference is - or should be - between "git log" > and "git rev-list" with (completely) user specified output. That > question goes both ways: > > - Why do we need "rev-list" to have completely flexible output when we > have "log" with such flexibility? > > - Why do we even have pretty formats for "rev-list"? > > I'm thinking of rev-list as a raw (plumbing) revision lister much like > cat-file is the inspection tool for the objects, and log as the human > facing output with appropriate defaults (resp. show). > > Note that "rev-list -v" isn't even documented afaics.
I can't answer your questions, because I don't have a very deep understanding of either command, but according to the "log" docu, formating really belongs to "rev-list" and "log" only adds the diff-* features: ------------------------------------------ The command takes options applicable to the git rev-list command to control what is shown and how, and options applicable to the git diff-* commands to control how the changes each commit introduces are shown. ------------------------------------------ I also feel that perhaps "pretty" is a bit of a misnomer and naturally is associated with "human readable", but the formating is vital for any raw output that scripts can process. Oliver -- 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
