NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.

use Perl

All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

Without JavaScript enabled, you might want to use the classic discussion system instead. If you login, you can remember this preference.

branches are points, not lines (Score:2)

by merlyn (47)
Git is all about the commits. Commits have parentage. Commits are shared. And some commits have human-friendly names. Tags are one kind of names, and are semi-static. Branches are a different kind of name, but generally move over time. Also, branches are repo-local, where tags are generally shared.
I think if you define carefully what you want to know, there are lots of options on "git log" that will give you what you want. But in a proper repo, branches are generally rather ephemeral (provided you a
--
- Randal L. Schwartz
- Stonehenge
easy peasy (Score:1)

by rjbs (4671)

I find it helps to not talk about the "branch" master but rather the "head" master. When you separate the fact that heads can cause branching from their essence, you can think of more ways to use git.
So, make a new head called "last-summary." Start it at commit x, presumably the current location of master.
In two weeks, get the output of `git log last-summary..master` and you will see all the changes that are between the two named commits. With that summary generated, you can now move last-summary to the

--
rjbs
Even though the others make good points… (Score:1)

by Aristotle (5147)

… I think you still want to look into git help reflog.