Re: [PATCH] rev-list docs: clarify --topo-order description

2012-08-14 Thread Michael Haggerty
On 08/14/2012 12:21 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote: We said --date-order still does not violate the topology, but it was still not clear enough. Reword the description for both --date-order and --topo-order, and add an illustration to it. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com Thanks for

Re: [PATCH] rev-list docs: clarify --topo-order description

2012-08-14 Thread Thomas Rast
Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com writes: --topo-order:: - - This option makes them appear in topological order (i.e. - descendant commits are shown before their parents). + This option makes them appear in topological order. Even + without this option, descendant commits

Re: [PATCH] rev-list docs: clarify --topo-order description

2012-08-14 Thread Junio C Hamano
Thomas Rast tr...@student.ethz.ch writes: So the --topo-order switch *ensures* that we process commits in topological order even in the face of skewed clocks. Yes, I *think* that I attempted to show with the illustration. I suspect that +their parents, but this tries to avoid showing

Re: [PATCH] rev-list docs: clarify --topo-order description

2012-08-14 Thread Thomas Rast
Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com writes: Thomas Rast tr...@student.ethz.ch writes: So the --topo-order switch *ensures* that we process commits in topological order even in the face of skewed clocks. Yes, I *think* that I attempted to show with the illustration. But then the new

Re: [PATCH] rev-list docs: clarify --topo-order description

2012-08-14 Thread Junio C Hamano
Martin von Zweigbergk martin.von.zweigbe...@gmail.com writes: Still, the Even without this option strongly suggests to me that what follows (descendant commits are shown before parents) applies to the By default case. Would it be correct to say something like By default, the commits are shown

Re: [PATCH] rev-list docs: clarify --topo-order description

2012-08-14 Thread Junio C Hamano
Thomas Rast tr...@student.ethz.ch writes: Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com writes: Thomas Rast tr...@student.ethz.ch writes: So the --topo-order switch *ensures* that we process commits in topological order even in the face of skewed clocks. Yes, I *think* that I attempted to show with

[PATCH] rev-list docs: clarify --topo-order description

2012-08-13 Thread Junio C Hamano
We said --date-order still does not violate the topology, but it was still not clear enough. Reword the description for both --date-order and --topo-order, and add an illustration to it. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com --- * Let's do this before I forget...; came up in

Re: [PATCH] rev-list docs: clarify --topo-order description

2012-08-13 Thread Martin von Zweigbergk
On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 3:21 PM, Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com wrote: * Let's do this before I forget...; came up in discussion $gmane/203370 Thanks! That definitely confused me (and I suppose I stupidly didn't test with a proper range). Documentation/rev-list-options.txt | 29

Re: [PATCH] rev-list docs: clarify --topo-order description

2012-08-13 Thread Junio C Hamano
Martin von Zweigbergk martin.von.zweigbe...@gmail.com writes: diff --git a/Documentation/rev-list-options.txt b/Documentation/rev-list-options.txt index 6a4b635..dc501ee 100644 --- a/Documentation/rev-list-options.txt +++ b/Documentation/rev-list-options.txt @@ -579,15 +579,32 @@ Commit

Re: [PATCH] rev-list docs: clarify --topo-order description

2012-08-13 Thread Martin von Zweigbergk
On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 4:05 PM, Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com wrote: Martin von Zweigbergk martin.von.zweigbe...@gmail.com writes: diff --git a/Documentation/rev-list-options.txt b/Documentation/rev-list-options.txt index 6a4b635..dc501ee 100644 --- a/Documentation/rev-list-options.txt