Re: Rollback of git commands

[Jeff King <peff@peff.net>]

On Wed, Nov 28, 2007 at 11:23:30AM -0500, Jon Smirl wrote:

> > Assuming that they also retain the "having an object implies having all
> > of the objects it points to" property, then it makes it hard to talk
> > about subsets or single refs. If I fetch from you and you communicate
> > your repo state as some hash, then I am stuck getting _all_ of your
> > refs to complete this property.
> 
> push/pull would still work at the branch level. The local state
> tracking objects wouldn't be exchanged.

Fair enough.

My spider sense still tingles about this, and I have the feeling that
you might run into weird merge problems when two refs are updated
simultaneously. I guess that shouldn't happen since you will write out
the complete "here are the refs" after every operation, leaving no room
for simultaneous updates, but I haven't given it enough thought to be
sure there aren't funny corner cases.

-Peff