From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: VCS comparison table Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2006 11:43:05 -0400 Message-ID: <20061020154305.GA29966@coredump.intra.peff.net> References: <200610180246.18758.jnareb@gmail.com> <45357CC3.4040507@utoronto.ca> <4536EC93.9050305@utoronto.ca> <87lkncev90.wl%cworth@cworth.org> <453792A8.1010700@utoronto.ca> <8764eg2qaa.wl%cworth@cworth.org> <20061019171409.GA31671@fieldses.org> <20061020143111.GB17497@coredump.intra.peff.net> <20061020153323.GA12886@fieldses.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Carl Worth , Aaron Bentley , Linus Torvalds , Jakub Narebski , Andreas Ericsson , bazaar-ng@lists.canonical.com, git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Oct 20 17:43:33 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GawWf-0005Co-S4 for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Fri, 20 Oct 2006 17:43:14 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1946450AbWJTPnK (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Oct 2006 11:43:10 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1946452AbWJTPnK (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Oct 2006 11:43:10 -0400 Received: from 66-23-211-5.clients.speedfactory.net ([66.23.211.5]:28394 "HELO peff.net") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1946450AbWJTPnI (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Oct 2006 11:43:08 -0400 Received: (qmail 370 invoked from network); 20 Oct 2006 11:43:06 -0400 Received: from unknown (HELO coredump.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.2) by 66-23-211-5.clients.speedfactory.net with SMTP; 20 Oct 2006 11:43:06 -0400 Received: by coredump.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Fri, 20 Oct 2006 11:43:05 -0400 To: "J. Bruce Fields" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20061020153323.GA12886@fieldses.org> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Fri, Oct 20, 2006 at 11:33:23AM -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote: > Well, I thought the discussion was about what meaning references have > after branches were modified or removed. In which case the interesting > situation is one where an object is gone but someone somewhere still > holds a reference (because the SHA1 was mentioned in a bug report or an > email or whatever). Git tries very hard to make sure you don't have a reference to something that doesn't exist. But yes, you could have a reference to the SHA1 in another, non-git source, and try to guess the data from it. However, there's a bit of a two-step procedure, since the SHA1 will likely be of the commit. You have to guess the commit author, date, message, and the contents of the rest of the tree to make a correct guess. In practice I think most "launch code" scenarios are less about guessable confidentiality, and more about ceasing to publish things you shouldn't be (like copyright or patent encumbered code). -Peff