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
Oliver Runge venit, vidit, dixit 06.04.2015 13:05:
Hallo, Mr. Hamano.
Thank you for your quick and detailed response.
On 5 April 2015 at 23:12, Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com wrote:
This is very much the designed behaviour, I would think. IIRC, the
user-format support of rev-list was
Hallo, Mr. Hamano.
Thank you for your quick and detailed response.
On 5 April 2015 at 23:12, Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com wrote:
This is very much the designed behaviour, I would think. IIRC, the
user-format support of rev-list was designed so that the scripts
can customize the output
Oliver Runge oliver.ru...@gmail.com writes:
I'm using git version 2.4.0-rc1. The same behavior exists in 2.1.0.
Trying the same with rev-list results in:
git rev-list --pretty=format:%h ... HEAD~3...HEAD
commit 826aed50cbb072d8f159e4c8ba0f9bd3df21a234
826aed5 ...
commit
Heyup, everybody.
Apologies if this turns out to be a duplicate. Gmane seems broken, so
I couldn't search the archive.
I'm using git version 2.4.0-rc1. The same behavior exists in 2.1.0.
With git-log it is possible to specify a custom pretty format that
outputs one line per commit:
git log
5 matches
Mail list logo