From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Alex Riesen Subject: Re: [RFC?] Telling git about more complex relationships between commits (Was: Re: FFmpeg considering GIT) Date: Sat, 5 May 2007 20:03:00 +0200 Message-ID: <20070505180300.GB2898@steel.home> References: <200705041353.17992.johan@herland.net> <20070504221152.GF4033@steel.home> <200705051449.45447.johan@herland.net> Reply-To: Alex Riesen Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: git@vger.kernel.org To: Johan Herland X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sat May 05 20:03:09 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1HkOb6-0001HW-1S for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Sat, 05 May 2007 20:03:08 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S934208AbXEESDE (ORCPT ); Sat, 5 May 2007 14:03:04 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S934209AbXEESDE (ORCPT ); Sat, 5 May 2007 14:03:04 -0400 Received: from mo-p07-ob.rzone.de ([81.169.146.189]:38826 "EHLO mo-p07-ob.rzone.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S934208AbXEESDD (ORCPT ); Sat, 5 May 2007 14:03:03 -0400 Received: from tigra.home (195.4.202.37) by post.webmailer.de (fruni mo17) (RZmta 5.9) with ESMTP id E048e4j45I2MVa ; Sat, 5 May 2007 20:03:00 +0200 (MEST) Received: from steel.home (steel.home [192.168.1.2]) by tigra.home (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84A93277BD; Sat, 5 May 2007 20:03:00 +0200 (CEST) Received: by steel.home (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 58635D171; Sat, 5 May 2007 20:03:00 +0200 (CEST) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200705051449.45447.johan@herland.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) X-RZG-AUTH: z4gQVF2k5XWuW3CcuQaGCTl9Ag== X-RZG-CLASS-ID: mo07 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Johan Herland, Sat, May 05, 2007 14:49:42 +0200: > Can you categorically say that there is no use for the following output? > (even if you need to pass an option to "git blame" to get it): > ==== > ^bb0203a (User A 2007-05-05 12:25:44 +0200 1) foo > ^bb0203a (User A 2007-05-05 12:25:44 +0200 1) bar > ^bb0203a (User A 2007-05-05 12:25:44 +0200 3) baz > ==== Assuming a repo which has 50% of all commits - reverts (just because someone could not be bothered to learn to use rebase, format-patch and git-am before sending things upstream) I would use the exact wording I used before. I'd say "it's dangerous" now. It hides the mess this repo is. > > It's useless. > > Maybe. At least some of the fields I proposed are probably useless. But > I don't think we should throw away the core idea unless we can show > that _all_ fields are useless. Just think of something you actually _can_ use. Implement it and try. And than, if you are convinced it actually is useful, try it on your friends. And after them, if you're still alive, try using it with old git (like 1.4 from Debian and Ubuntu).