Before Q3 2019, no.
But with Git 2.23, you will be able to instruct git blame to ignore those two problematic commits. (IntelliJ "annotate" feature might take a while before catching up)
blame: add the ability to ignore commits and their changes
Commits that make formatting changes or function renames are often not interesting when blaming a file.
A user may deem such a commit as 'not interesting' and want to ignore and its changes it when assigning blame.
For example, say a file has the following git history / rev-list:
---O---A---X---B---C---D---Y---E---F
Commits X and Y both touch a particular line, and the other commits do
not:
X: "Take a third parameter"
-MyFunc(1, 2);
+MyFunc(1, 2, 3);
Y: "Remove camelcase"
-MyFunc(1, 2, 3);
+my_func(1, 2, 3);
git-blame will blame Y for the change.
I'd like to be able to ignore Y: both the existence of the commit as well as any changes it made.
This differs from -S rev-list, which specifies the list of commits to process for the blame.
We would still process Y, but just don't let the blame 'stick.'
This patch adds the ability for users to ignore a revision with --ignore-rev=rev, which may be repeated.
They can specify a set of files of full object names of revs, e.g. SHA-1 hashes, one per line.
A single file may be specified with the blame.ignoreRevFile config option
or with --ignore-rev-file=file.
Both the config option and the command line option may be repeated multiple times.
An empty file name "" will clear the list of revs from previously processed files.
Config options are processed before command line options.
For a typical use case, projects will maintain the file containing revisions for commits that perform mass reformatting, and their users have the option to ignore all of the commits in that file.
Additionally, a user can use the --ignore-rev option for one-off investigation.
To go back to the example above, X was a substantive change to the function, but not the change the user is interested in.
The user inspected X, but wanted to find the previous change to that line - perhaps a commit that introduced that function call.
To make this work, we can't simply remove all ignored commits from the rev-list.
We need to diff the changes introduced by Y so that we can ignore them.
We let the blames get passed to Y, just like when processing normally.
When Y is the target, we make sure that Y does not keep any blames.
Any changes that Y is responsible for get passed to its parent. Note we make one pass through all of the scapegoats (parents) to attempt to pass blame normally; we don't know if we need to ignore the commit until we've checked all of the parents.
The blame_entry will get passed up the tree until we find a commit that has a diff chunk that affects those lines.
One issue is that the ignored commit did make some change, and there is no general solution to finding the line in the parent commit that corresponds to a given line in the ignored commit.
That makes it hard to attribute a particular line within an ignored commit's diff
correctly.
For example, the parent of an ignored commit has this, say at line 11:
commit-a 11) #include "a.h"
commit-b 12) #include "b.h"
Commit X, which we will ignore, swaps these lines:
commit-X 11) #include "b.h"
commit-X 12) #include "a.h"
We can pass that blame entry to the parent, but line 11 will be attributed to commit A, even though "include b.h" came from commit B.
The blame mechanism will be looking at the parent's view of the file at line number 11.
ignore_blame_entry() is set up to allow alternative algorithms for guessing per-line blames.
Any line that is not attributed to the parent will continue to be blamed on the ignored commit as if that commit was not ignored.
Upcoming patches have the ability to detect these lines and mark them in the blame output.
The existing algorithm is simple: blame each line on the corresponding line in the parent's diff chunk.
Any lines beyond that stay with the target.
For example, the parent of an ignored commit has this, say at line 11:
commit-a 11) void new_func_1(void *x, void *y);
commit-b 12) void new_func_2(void *x, void *y);
commit-c 13) some_line_c
commit-d 14) some_line_d
After a commit 'X', we have:
commit-X 11) void new_func_1(void *x,
commit-X 12) void *y);
commit-X 13) void new_func_2(void *x,
commit-X 14) void *y);
commit-c 15) some_line_c
commit-d 16) some_line_d
Commit X nets two additionally lines: 13 and 14.
The current guess_line_blames() algorithm will not attribute these to the parent,
whose diff chunk is only two lines - not four.
When we ignore with the current algorithm, we get:
commit-a 11) void new_func_1(void *x,
commit-b 12) void *y);
commit-X 13) void new_func_2(void *x,
commit-X 14) void *y);
commit-c 15) some_line_c
commit-d 16) some_line_d
Note that line 12 was blamed on B, though B was the commit for new_func_2(), not new_func_1().
Even when guess_line_blames() finds a line in the parent, it may still be incorrect.
