From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Shawn O. Pearce" Subject: Re: extra headers in commit objects Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2010 12:31:48 -0800 Message-ID: <20100203203148.GF14799@spearce.org> References: <20100203174041.GC14799@spearce.org> <9b18b3111002031101p3385ecdfo638433bc269791aa@mail.gmail.com> <20100203192658.GP9553@machine.or.cz> <9b18b3111002031143h63aaa6bpa4c91d140a769bb0@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Petr Baudis , Nicolas Pitre , git To: demerphq X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Feb 03 21:32:07 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NcltN-0002vC-Pb for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Wed, 03 Feb 2010 21:32:06 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932655Ab0BCUbx (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Feb 2010 15:31:53 -0500 Received: from mail-iw0-f201.google.com ([209.85.223.201]:39608 "EHLO mail-iw0-f201.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932439Ab0BCUbv (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Feb 2010 15:31:51 -0500 Received: by iwn39 with SMTP id 39so2061436iwn.1 for ; Wed, 03 Feb 2010 12:31:50 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.231.79.12 with SMTP id n12mr191564ibk.59.1265229110629; Wed, 03 Feb 2010 12:31:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost ([209.20.77.23]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 21sm50289iwn.2.2010.02.03.12.31.49 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Wed, 03 Feb 2010 12:31:49 -0800 (PST) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <9b18b3111002031143h63aaa6bpa4c91d140a769bb0@mail.gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17+20080114 (2008-01-14) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: demerphq wrote: > On 3 February 2010 20:26, Petr Baudis wrote: > Right. The only solution i can see would have had to have been > implemented already. And that would involved some headers being marked > "pass through", some "marked throw away on cherry-pick" and some > "choke horribly if you find this and dont know what it is". > > And even with somethng like that one wonders if notes arent really a > better alternative to user defined headers anyway? Yes, exactly. I think notes turn out to be a much better way to store this extra data, provided you are OK with them being disconnected during an amend, cherry-pick, filter-branch, or rebase... :-) And unlike additional headers, git implementations will likely support notes, because they are a good way to attach additional user data onto commits. -- Shawn.