Re: policy and mechanism for less-connected clients

[Raimund Bauer <ray007@gmx.net>]

On Wed, 2008-06-25 at 15:17 -0400, Daniel Barkalow wrote:

> You have a fundamental misconception about git's data model. A commit 
> doesn't have a particular branch it is on. There is only the DAG, where 
> each node is a commit that is structured identically to all of the other 
> commits. Branches pick out particular nodes in the DAG at particular 
> times.

But a branch in repository also has a local history. The ref-log.
And git could use that to produce a distributed branch-history.

<wishful thinking>

A developer prepares a series of commits in a local branch to push to
the server.
On the server the ref-log of a branch gets updated with a new entry for
each push, and other developers pulling from the server get the servers
ref-log as ref-log of their remote tracking branch and can see the
push-points there.

Those push-points seem to be somehow more important than other commits -
there was a reason for the first developer to push right this branch
tip, right?
Seems like valuable (optional) information to me.

</wishful thinking>

> It therefore doesn't make any sense to ask if a commit is directly hanging 
> off of master. If your local branch is up to date, and you commit, your 
> commit's parent is the current master. If you now check out master and 
> merge your local branch, master gets the same (non-merge) commit.

Check if the commit is in master's ref-log?

regards,
Ray