From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Woodhouse Subject: Re: kernel.org now has gitweb installed Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 09:29:15 +0100 Message-ID: <1114676955.12012.346.camel@baythorne.infradead.org> References: <42703E79.8050808@zytor.com> <1114673723.12012.324.camel@baythorne.infradead.org> <20050428081005.GG8612@pasky.ji.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" , Git Mailing List X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Apr 28 10:24:49 2005 Return-path: Received: from vger.kernel.org ([12.107.209.244]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DR4Jm-00017K-D6 for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Thu, 28 Apr 2005 10:24:18 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261784AbVD1I3e (ORCPT ); Thu, 28 Apr 2005 04:29:34 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261818AbVD1I3e (ORCPT ); Thu, 28 Apr 2005 04:29:34 -0400 Received: from baythorne.infradead.org ([81.187.226.107]:25510 "EHLO baythorne.infradead.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261784AbVD1I3R (ORCPT ); Thu, 28 Apr 2005 04:29:17 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1]) by baythorne.infradead.org with esmtpsa (Exim 4.43 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1DR4OZ-0008CS-Dl; Thu, 28 Apr 2005 09:29:15 +0100 To: Petr Baudis In-Reply-To: <20050428081005.GG8612@pasky.ji.cz> X-Mailer: Evolution 2.0.4 (2.0.4-1.dwmw2.1) X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by baythorne.infradead.org See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 2005-04-28 at 10:10 +0200, Petr Baudis wrote: > Linus ASM (Anonymous Subsystem Maintainer) > > |------------------------. > A| |B > | | > | \-------------\ > | : | > \------------------------\ |E > C| |D | > | /-------------/ > | |F > /------------------------/ > > How would you show that? F E D C B A? F D C A E B? Let us assume that C and A were already in Linus' tree (and on our web page) yesterday. Thus, they should be last. The newly-pulled stuff should be first -- FEDBCA. I'd say "depth-first, remote parent first" but that would actually show show 'A' (as a parent of D) long before it shows C. Walking of remote parents should stop as soon as we hit a commit which was accessible through a more local parent, rather than as soon as we hit a commit which we've already printed. Maybe it should be something like depth- first, local parent first, but _reversed_? The latter is what the mailing list feeder does, but that has the advantage of being about to use 'rev-tree $today ^$yesterday' so we _know_ we're excluding the ones people have already seen. Hence I haven't really paid that much attention to getting the order strictly correct. (Yes, I know that strictly speaking, git has no concept of 'remote' or 'local' parents. But the ordering of the two parents in a Cogito merge or pull hasn't changed, has it?) -- dwmw2