From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Gleixner Subject: Re: [PATCH] [RFD] Add repoid identifier to commit Date: Wed, 11 May 2005 22:48:38 +0000 Organization: linutronix Message-ID: <1115851718.22180.153.camel@tglx> References: <1115847510.22180.108.camel@tglx> <2780.10.10.10.24.1115848852.squirrel@linux1> <1115849141.22180.123.camel@tglx> <2807.10.10.10.24.1115850254.squirrel@linux1> <1115850619.22180.133.camel@tglx> <2853.10.10.10.24.1115850996.squirrel@linux1> Reply-To: tglx@linutronix.de Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu May 12 00:41:18 2005 Return-path: Received: from vger.kernel.org ([12.107.209.244]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DVzsR-0002MK-F2 for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Thu, 12 May 2005 00:40:27 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261295AbVEKWr6 (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 May 2005 18:47:58 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261299AbVEKWr6 (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 May 2005 18:47:58 -0400 Received: from 213-239-205-147.clients.your-server.de ([213.239.205.147]:64898 "EHLO mail.tglx.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261295AbVEKWrs (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 May 2005 18:47:48 -0400 Received: from mail.tec.linutronix.de (unknown [192.168.0.1]) by mail.tglx.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8273565C003; Thu, 12 May 2005 00:47:45 +0200 (CEST) Received: from tglx.tec.linutronix.de (tglx.tec.linutronix.de [192.168.0.68]) by mail.tec.linutronix.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 33081282A1; Thu, 12 May 2005 00:47:47 +0200 (CEST) To: Sean In-Reply-To: <2853.10.10.10.24.1115850996.squirrel@linux1> X-Mailer: Evolution 2.2.2 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 2005-05-11 at 18:36 -0400, Sean wrote: > On Wed, May 11, 2005 6:30 pm, Thomas Gleixner said: > > > At this point it is completely irrelevant if you pulled from A or B. The > > originator of Head A is A forever. > > But who cares what repository was used to create the object? You can't > talk to a repository. What you want to know is who created the object, > and Author/Committer completely solves that problem. Maybe you have missed the point, where one Committer holds more than one repository. See davem/net-2.6 and davem/sparc-2.6. Not to talk of Russell King's and Greg's multiple repositories. The Author is irrelevant, because one Author sends patches to more than one maintainer. Author _cannot_ be a source of tracking information. If you want to do heuristic guesses on Author/Committer pairs, then you make the situation more complex than it is already. > If on the otherhand you're trying to reliably track the chain-of-command > that landed the object in your repository, your patch falls short. As I said before it is completely irrelevant whether fast forward was pulled into C directly from A or from B. Whats the relevant content of getting the same thing from A or B ? If you want to do this, you break the fast forward mechanism and reinvent the pull ping-pong which is avoided by the fast forwards. tglx