Re: [RFC] Applying a graft to a tree and "rippling" the changes through

[Yann Dirson <ydirson@altern.org>]

On Sat, Nov 19, 2005 at 03:04:05PM +0100, Yann Dirson wrote:
> Trees have an existence outside any consideration of what changes led
> to them, as shown by the fact that git trees do not reference anything
> outside them.  And it is right that, at that level, noone tells you
> how you got there - not less nor more than when you fetch a
> linux-x.y.z.tar.gz2 from kernel.org.
> 
> Then at a bit higher level, you can consider changes from a tree to a
> tree.  What you usually do when you commit a change is explaining what
> you change to the tree.  Then changes themselves are just derived from
> the trees (iow, "abstracted from" the trees), and you augment this
> information with a message explaining what you did.
> 
> Then at a still higher level, you can derive history lines from the
> individual trees and changes, and augment this information, eg. by
> signing them.

IOW,
- 1st level describes states that existed
- 2nd level describes events that occured, causing the state to change
- 3rd level describes the succession of events

and for the record, I am likely to introduce with ArcheoloGIT a 4th
level, which will describe how our idea of history evolves over time.

Best regards,
-- 
Yann Dirson    <ydirson@altern.org> |
Debian-related: <dirson@debian.org> |   Support Debian GNU/Linux:
                                    |  Freedom, Power, Stability, Gratis
     http://ydirson.free.fr/        | Check <http://www.debian.org/>