[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       git
Subject:    Re: git log -p unexpected behaviour
From:       John Tapsell <johnflux () gmail ! com>
Date:       2013-05-01 7:23:32
Message-ID: CAHQ6N+rs1miLLUWsGvu5W-nUxU9NK30JEo8gcjXpdGLLXvqK7g () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

On 30 April 2013 21:38, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
> John Tapsell <johnflux@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> On 30 April 2013 20:44, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
>>> John Tapsell <johnflux@gmail.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> Is there no way to fix --cc to work even in the edge cases?
>>>
>>> Can you clarify what you mean by "fix" and "edge cases"?
>>
>> My understanding is that even with -cc there will be changes that
>> won't be seen - and hence why --cc could be even more of a "security
>> risk", no?
>
> Combined diff is a way to show a tricky conflict resolved in a
> tricky way, so that the tricky-ness of the resolution can be
> examined.  A trivial resolution that takes one side is not shown
> because it is not usually interesting.

I don't really understand your point sorry.  In this trivial
resolution case, you would still just see the commit that added the
code in a later commit.  No?

There couldn't be a case where you add or change a line of code, but
not see it with --cc ?

> This design choice of course
> have to trust people involved in the project do not pull from
> untrustworthy sources.
>
> You would need "log -p -m" (without any pathspec) for the kind of
> "security" you are talking about.  Note that "-p -m --first-parent"
> is not necessarily enough.

This results in seeing the same change more than once though, right?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]