From: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@gmail.com>
To: Petr Baudis <pasky@suse.cz>
Cc: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>,
Joel Becker <Joel.Becker@oracle.com>,
Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>,
mason@suse.com, git@vger.kernel.org,
Chuck Lever <cel@citi.umich.edu>
Subject: Re: hgmq vs. StGIT
Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2005 17:34:43 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <b0943d9e0511010934m8d32eb2i@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20051101101004.GD11618@pasky.or.cz>
On 01/11/05, Petr Baudis <pasky@suse.cz> wrote:
> Dear diary, on Tue, Nov 01, 2005 at 10:23:55AM CET, I got a letter
> where Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@gmail.com> told me that...
> > That's not too far away. Chuck Lever has a patch (and there were some
> > other discussions in the past) for tracking the history of a patch.
> > Basically, there would be another commit object, not reachable from
> > HEAD but only via an StGIT command, which would chain all the versions
> > of a patch. You would be able to view them with gitk for example.
>
> Perhaps you could emulate the topical branches - one patch == one head.
> E.g. for patch foo-bar on branch 'master', you would create head
> master/foo-bar, etc.
The patches need to be chained so a top patch would also refer to the
previously applied patches since they are its base. Anyway, I don't
like adding too many files to the refs/heads directory.
> > My main issue was whether we should store every state resulted from a
> > refresh or use a separate command (somebody suggested 'freeze') to
> > mark the states that should be preserved in the history. Chuck's patch
> > implements the first. The drawback is that a future 'stg prune'
> > command would not be able to remove the history and some states of the
> > patch might not be useful (there are times when I do a refresh only to
> > pop the patch and modify a different one, without any logical meaning
> > for the state of the patch).
>
> I'd prefer the snapshotting being done in refresh anyway. Perhaps you
> would be asked for log message when you refresh by default, but when you
> refresh -n or something, only a temporary commit would be created and
> next refresh would mutate it instead of creating another commit.
The refresh -n should be the default and maybe just specifying an
option when you want to add a comment to that commit. But, by mutating
the temporary commit, wouldn't this mean that you lose the refresh
history?
> Anyway, "freeze" is confusing. Perhaps "snapshot" if anything...
You are right.
--
Catalin
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-11-01 17:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 64+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-10-31 1:50 git versus CVS (versus bk) walt
2005-10-31 1:59 ` Martin Langhoff
2005-10-31 2:03 ` H. Peter Anvin
2005-10-31 2:35 ` Linus Torvalds
2005-10-31 10:24 ` Johannes Schindelin
2005-10-31 16:18 ` Linus Torvalds
2005-10-31 18:18 ` wa1ter
2005-10-31 19:44 ` Randal L. Schwartz
2005-10-31 23:41 ` walt
2005-11-01 0:15 ` Daniel Barkalow
2005-11-01 0:21 ` Linus Torvalds
2005-10-31 19:50 ` Joel Becker
2005-10-31 20:28 ` Martin Langhoff
2005-10-31 21:30 ` Joel Becker
2005-11-01 9:15 ` Petr Baudis
2005-11-01 16:17 ` Joel Becker
2005-11-01 17:35 ` Petr Baudis
2005-11-07 22:56 ` Petr Baudis
2005-11-08 10:50 ` Josef Weidendorfer
2005-11-08 12:04 ` Petr Baudis
2005-11-01 2:17 ` Randal L. Schwartz
2005-11-01 2:23 ` Linus Torvalds
2005-11-01 2:34 ` Randal L. Schwartz
2005-11-01 2:47 ` Linus Torvalds
2005-11-01 2:35 ` Junio C Hamano
2005-11-01 23:56 ` Horst von Brand
2005-11-02 8:54 ` Andreas Ericsson
2005-11-02 9:26 ` Junio C Hamano
2005-10-31 21:00 ` Junio C Hamano
2005-10-31 21:36 ` Joel Becker
2005-10-31 21:53 ` Linus Torvalds
2005-10-31 22:14 ` Junio C Hamano
2005-10-31 22:42 ` Joel Becker
2005-11-01 0:20 ` Junio C Hamano
2005-11-01 0:42 ` Joel Becker
2005-11-01 1:02 ` Martin Langhoff
2005-11-01 1:29 ` Joel Becker
2005-11-01 1:48 ` Linus Torvalds
2005-11-01 9:17 ` Petr Baudis
2005-11-01 13:25 ` Catalin Marinas
2005-11-01 0:25 ` Theodore Ts'o
2005-11-01 9:08 ` hgmq vs. StGIT Petr Baudis
2005-11-01 9:23 ` Catalin Marinas
2005-11-01 10:10 ` Petr Baudis
2005-11-01 17:34 ` Catalin Marinas [this message]
2005-11-01 15:20 ` Chuck Lever
2005-11-01 15:36 ` Chris Mason
2005-11-01 17:18 ` Catalin Marinas
2005-11-01 18:13 ` Chris Mason
2005-11-01 21:30 ` Catalin Marinas
2005-11-02 15:41 ` Chris Mason
2005-11-05 20:23 ` Catalin Marinas
2005-11-09 23:32 ` Petr Baudis
2005-11-10 0:08 ` Pavel Machek
2005-11-10 16:20 ` Catalin Marinas
2005-11-01 14:11 ` Chris Mason
2005-11-01 16:00 ` Linus Torvalds
2005-11-01 17:13 ` Catalin Marinas
2005-11-01 17:29 ` Catalin Marinas
2005-11-01 17:59 ` Chris Mason
2005-11-01 21:22 ` Catalin Marinas
2005-11-01 0:31 ` git versus CVS (versus bk) Daniel Barkalow
2005-10-31 21:35 ` Linus Torvalds
2005-10-31 13:00 ` wa1ter
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=b0943d9e0511010934m8d32eb2i@mail.gmail.com \
--to=catalin.marinas@gmail.com \
--cc=Joel.Becker@oracle.com \
--cc=cel@citi.umich.edu \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=junkio@cox.net \
--cc=mason@suse.com \
--cc=pasky@suse.cz \
--cc=tytso@mit.edu \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.