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 Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2008 07:39:10 +0200 Message-ID: <20080912053910.GA22228@cuci.nl> References: <20080909132212.GA25476@cuci.nl> <20080911194447.GD1451@cuci.nl> <200809112205.16928.jnareb@gmail.com> <20080911202228.GG1451@cuci.nl> <48C9B830.2060903@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Jakub Narebski , Nicolas Pitre , Theodore Tso , Linus Torvalds , git@vger.kernel.org To: A Large Angry SCM X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Sep 12 07:43:59 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 1Ke1Rm-0007Kq-Q1 for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Fri, 12 Sep 2008 07:43:59 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751788AbYILFjM (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Sep 2008 01:39:12 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752120AbYILFjM (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Sep 2008 01:39:12 -0400 Received: from aristoteles.cuci.nl ([212.125.128.18]:50626 "EHLO aristoteles.cuci.nl" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751676AbYILFjM (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Sep 2008 01:39:12 -0400 Received: by aristoteles.cuci.nl (Postfix, from userid 500) id A61465465; Fri, 12 Sep 2008 07:39:10 +0200 (CEST) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <48C9B830.2060903@gmail.com> 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: A Large Angry SCM wrote: >Stephen R. van den Berg wrote: >>Jakub Narebski wrote: >>>Stephen R. van den Berg wrote: >>>>Well, the principle of least surprise dictates that they should be kept >>>>by gc as described above, however... >>>>I can envision an option to gc say "--drop-weak-links" which does >>>>exactly what you describe. >>>Well, IIRC the need for this was one of the causes of "death" of 'prior' >>>header link proposal... >>As I understood it, one of the causes of death of the "prior" link >>proposal was that it was unclear if it pulled in the linked-to commits >>upon fetch. In the "origin" case, the default is *not* to fetch them. >And that's WRONG. Both prior and origin must fetch them if they're >reference in the header. By definition of the origin headerfield that is not wrong, there are no other rules. But the point is moot at the moment, since I'm going to create a proof of concept which puts the field in the free-form trailer. -- Sincerely, Stephen R. van den Berg. "Father's Day: Nine months before Mother's Day."