From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Stephen R. van den Berg" Subject: Re: [RFC] origin link for cherry-pick and revert, and more about porcelain-level metadata Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2008 13:49:40 +0200 Message-ID: <20080910114940.GA14127@cuci.nl> References: <20080909132212.GA25476@cuci.nl> <20080909211355.GB10544@machine.or.cz> <20080909225603.GA7459@cuci.nl> <20080909230525.GC10360@machine.or.cz> <48C794D6.20001@gnu.org> <20080910104424.GH10360@machine.or.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Paolo Bonzini , git@vger.kernel.org To: Petr Baudis X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Sep 10 13:50:51 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1KdODj-0004OB-2e for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Wed, 10 Sep 2008 13:50:51 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752213AbYIJLtm (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Sep 2008 07:49:42 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752135AbYIJLtm (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Sep 2008 07:49:42 -0400 Received: from aristoteles.cuci.nl ([212.125.128.18]:39792 "EHLO aristoteles.cuci.nl" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752101AbYIJLtl (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Sep 2008 07:49:41 -0400 Received: by aristoteles.cuci.nl (Postfix, from userid 500) id AB8135465; Wed, 10 Sep 2008 13:49:40 +0200 (CEST) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080910104424.GH10360@machine.or.cz> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Petr Baudis wrote: >On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 11:35:18AM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: >But that is irrelevant. If you already have the objects, whether to >follow the origin link does not matter at all. >I argue that the following the origin link by one step is harmful as it >violated the internal Git object model and does not have real benefits. >If you want to have the origin links, do not follow them at all - the >commit objects themselves are not useful. (Or, optionally, follow them >fully - that of course can make sense.) The origin links are rarely followed, not even by one step. They are only followed if a certain operation requires them (not a lot do). >> > And why are the notes created by git cherry-pick -x insufficient for that? >> For example, these notes (or the ones created by "git revert") are >> *wrong* because they talk about commits instead of changesets (deltas >> between two commits). >(BTW, I don't feel strongly enough about the header-freeform distinction >to argue about it and some of your and others' points are good. But even >if we have the origin links, I think we should only follow them not at >all or fully.) Maybe we have a misunderstanding about what "follow a link" means and when it is done. During most normal git operation, the origin links are just read, but not followed. The only commands that I expect to follow them are log --graph, gitk, fsck and blame. I may have missed some corner use-cases, but this should cover most of it; i.e. most of git ignores them or just makes note of the hashvalues provided. -- Sincerely, Stephen R. van den Berg. "Am I paying for this abuse or is it extra?"