Previously, the default history treated bottom commits the same as any
other UNINTERESTING commit, which could force it down side branches.
Consider the following history:
*A--*B---D--*F * marks !TREESAME parent paths
\ /*
`-C-'
When requesting "B..F", B is UNINTERESTING but TREESAME to D. C is
!UNINTERESTING.
So default following would go from D into the irrelevant side branch C
to A, rather than to B. Note also that if there had been an extra
!UNINTERESTING commit B1 between B and D, it wouldn't have gone down C.
Change the default following to test relevant_commit() instead of
!UNINTERESTING, so it can proceed straight from D to B, thus finishing
the traversal of that path.
Signed-off-by: Kevin Bracey <kevin@bracey.fi>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
When using --parents or --children, get_commit_action() previously showed
all merges, even if TREESAME to both parents.
This was intended to tie together the topology of the rewritten parents,
but it was excessive - in fact we only need to show merges that have two
or more relevant parents. Merges at the boundary do not necessarily need
to be shown.
Signed-off-by: Kevin Bracey <kevin@bracey.fi>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Use the BOTTOM flag to define relevance for pruning. Relevant commits
are those that are !UNINTERESTING or BOTTOM, and this allows us to
identify irrelevant side branches (UNINTERESTING && !BOTTOM).
If a merge has relevant parents, and it is TREESAME to them, then do not
let irrelevant parents cause the merge to be treated as !TREESAME.
When considering simplification, don't always include all merges -
merges with exactly one relevant parent can be simplified, if TREESAME
according to the above rule.
These two changes greatly increase simplification in limited, pruned
revision lists.
Signed-off-by: Kevin Bracey <kevin@bracey.fi>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
When simplifying an odd merge, such as one that used "-s ours", we may
find ourselves TREESAME to apparently redundant parents. Prevent
simplify_merges() from removing every TREESAME parent; if this would
happen reinstate the first TREESAME parent - the one that the default
log would have followed.
This avoids producing a totally disjoint history from the default log
when the default log is a better explanation of the end result, and aids
visualisation of odd merges.
Signed-off-by: Kevin Bracey <kevin@bracey.fi>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
History simplification previously always treated merges as TREESAME
if they were TREESAME to any parent.
While this was consistent with the default behaviour, this could be
extremely unhelpful when searching detailed history, and could not be
overridden. For example, if a merge had ignored a change, as if by "-s
ours", then:
git log -m -p --full-history -Schange file
would successfully locate "change"'s addition but would not locate the
merge that resolved against it.
Futher, simplify_merges could drop the actual parent that a commit
was TREESAME to, leaving it as a normal commit marked TREESAME that
isn't actually TREESAME to its remaining parent.
Now redefine a commit's TREESAME flag to be true only if a commit is
TREESAME to _all_ of its parents. This doesn't affect either the default
simplify_history behaviour (because partially TREESAME merges are turned
into normal commits), or full-history with parent rewriting (because all
merges are output). But it does affect other modes. The clearest
difference is that --full-history will show more merges - sufficient to
ensure that -m -p --full-history log searches can really explain every
change to the file, including those changes' ultimate fate in merges.
Also modify simplify_merges to recalculate TREESAME after removing
a parent. This is achieved by storing per-parent TREESAME flags on the
initial scan, so the combined flag can be easily recomputed.
This fixes some t6111 failures, but creates a couple of new ones -
we are now showing some merges that don't need to be shown.
Signed-off-by: Kevin Bracey <kevin@bracey.fi>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Some side branching and odd merging to illustrate various flaws in
revision list scans, particularly when limiting the list.
Many expected failures, which will be gone by the end of the "history
traversal refinements" series.
Signed-off-by: Kevin Bracey <kevin@bracey.fi>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
