Re: [PATCH v2] blame: avoid checking if a file exists on the working tree if a revision is provided

2015-11-19 Thread Eric Sunshine
On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 6:22 PM, Jeff King wrote: > On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 06:01:25PM -0500, Eric Sunshine wrote: >> On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 5:48 PM, Jeff King wrote: >> > Hmm. Out of curiosity I tried: >> > >> > git blame v2.4.0 -- t/t6031-merge-recursive.sh >>

Re: [PATCH v2] blame: avoid checking if a file exists on the working tree if a revision is provided

2015-11-17 Thread Stefan Beller
On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 2:48 PM, Jeff King wrote: > On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 12:11:25AM -0500, Eric Sunshine wrote: > >> > blame content even if the path provided does match an existing >> > blob on said revision. >> >> git-blame documentation does not advertise "blame " as a >>

Re: [PATCH v2] blame: avoid checking if a file exists on the working tree if a revision is provided

2015-11-17 Thread Edmundo Carmona Antoranz
On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 5:37 PM, Edmundo Carmona Antoranz wrote: > So, do I forget about the blame patch (given that I'm not fixing an > advertised syntax, even if it's supported) and fix annotate instead or > do I fix both? And if I should swing for both, do I create a

Re: [PATCH v2] blame: avoid checking if a file exists on the working tree if a revision is provided

2015-11-17 Thread Eric Sunshine
On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 5:48 PM, Jeff King wrote: > On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 12:11:25AM -0500, Eric Sunshine wrote: >> > blame content even if the path provided does match an existing >> > blob on said revision. >> >> git-blame documentation does not advertise "blame " as a >>

Re: [PATCH v2] blame: avoid checking if a file exists on the working tree if a revision is provided

2015-11-17 Thread Edmundo Carmona Antoranz
On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 11:11 PM, Eric Sunshine wrote: > > This subject is a bit long; try to keep it to about 72 characters or less. > > More importantly, though, it doesn't give us a high level overview of > the purpose of the patch, which is that it is fixing blame to

Re: [PATCH v2] blame: avoid checking if a file exists on the working tree if a revision is provided

2015-11-17 Thread Jeff King
On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 12:11:25AM -0500, Eric Sunshine wrote: > > blame content even if the path provided does match an existing > > blob on said revision. > > git-blame documentation does not advertise "blame " as a > valid invocation. It does advertise "blame -- ", and this > case already

Re: [PATCH v2] blame: avoid checking if a file exists on the working tree if a revision is provided

2015-11-17 Thread Jeff King
On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 06:01:25PM -0500, Eric Sunshine wrote: > On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 5:48 PM, Jeff King wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 12:11:25AM -0500, Eric Sunshine wrote: > >> > blame content even if the path provided does match an existing > >> > blob on said revision.

[PATCH v2] blame: avoid checking if a file exists on the working tree if a revision is provided

2015-11-16 Thread Edmundo Carmona Antoranz
If a file has been deleted/renamed, blame refused to display blame content even if the path provided does match an existing blob on said revision. $ git status On branch hide Changes not staged for commit: (use "git add/rm ..." to update what will be committed) (use "git checkout -- ..." to

Re: [PATCH v2] blame: avoid checking if a file exists on the working tree if a revision is provided

2015-11-16 Thread Eric Sunshine
On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 8:29 PM, Edmundo Carmona Antoranz wrote: > blame: avoid checking if a file exists on the working tree > if a revision is provided This subject is a bit long; try to keep it to about 72 characters or less. More importantly, though, it doesn't give us