[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: VC top of the tree diff and log

From: Miles Bader
Subject: Re: VC top of the tree diff and log
Date: Thu, 09 Jul 2009 12:05:29 +0900

Dan Nicolaescu <address@hidden> writes:
>   > Would be useful, though I dunno what you'd bind it too... at some point
>   > having too many bindings for essentially-similar-commands becomes kind
>   > of annoying/confusing.
> I am thinking that we could have 2 modes for the log: 
> - a short one that would be used by default for directory logs
> - the current long one that would be used for file logs
> (I haven't completely thought this through)...

I normally am interested in exactly the same thing from either file or
project logs:  detailed info about the last few changesets.  I use short
logs too (when I'm trying to discover longer-term trends instead of
detailed info), but there seems no connection with whether I restrict
the scope to a file or not.

What sounds nice to me would be a quick "toggle log mode" binding in the
log display buffer (with caching so it's fast, and smart preservation of
point position in the log, etc), or maybe even better, a "toggle
detailed info for this entry" binding, but maybe those aren't so easy to
implement in emacs...  [Hmm... "*" comes to mind for some reason, though
I have no idea why...]

As far as global vs. file logs, I think maybe I'd prefer to _always_ get
global logs in git/svn/... but with some slight hint about the file when
invoked from a file buffer -- e.g., maybe display entries not related to
the file in a "dim" face, and initially position the cursor on the first
modification to the file, etc.  My reasoning is that I don't think I
really mean "show me the history of this file", when I use "C-x v l",
but rather "show me recent history of the project, given that I happen
to be in a file in that project".  [Real file logs would be nice too,
when there's too much chaff, but they seem secondary, rather than

[Incidentally, one thing that definitely _should_ work, but doesn't, is
that "C-x v l" in a dired buffer...]

I suppose maybe the real question underlying this thread is how much vc
should try to emulate historical CVS-oriented behavior when used with
newer source control systems that have different models.  Personally I
think it should be a bit looser about this, and do what's "natural"
rather than what's "historically compatible".  But maybe that's just


P.S.  All information contained in the above letter is false,
      for reasons of military security.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]