[MERGE] left align log output if it only contains merge revisions

[Aaron Bentley]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Kent Gibson wrote:
> The only way that can be true is if mainline revisions are somehow
> special.
> That surprises me, since from my POV revisions are revisions.
> - From your POV mainline revisions are special because, well, because
> they are mainline revisions???

That's right.  They are the revisions that are part of the active
history of the branch.  They were either committed on this branch, or
committed on a branch that was pulled into this branch.

The merged revisions were never committed on this branch.  They most
likely were never present in a working tree for this branch.  They
weren't even on the mainline of a branch you pulled into this branch.
They certainly are part of the history, but not in the same way that
mainline revisions are.

In fact, I frequently use the --short log view, which only shows
mainline revisions.

> I really don't see the point of the indent in this case.
> That they are not mainline revisions is clear.
> The patch is intended to tidy the output specifically in this case.
> Just because that case may be a 1% corner case does not make the patch
> any less valid.

Special casing is always a warning sign.  Sometimes it is necessary, but
it often means that you haven't thought the general case through
carefully enough.

But my point about 99% is that the 99% of cases build the expectation
that the flush-aligned revisions are mainline revisions.

> But since the patch is so obviously inconsistent, -1 from me.
> Get it out of the queue so you can concentrate on something more
> worthwhile.

Thanks.  I'm sorry if this has been frustrating for you.

Aaron
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFGils+0F+nu1YWqI0RAlDoAJwJwzx+MyBBFqIM6qj97/MpFVlI/ACfW44E
+1CkSlWKAdhsUJba4Cj055A=
=W1qy
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----