From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Johan Herland Subject: Re: notes metadata? Date: Sun, 07 Feb 2010 23:57:24 +0100 Message-ID: <201002072357.24021.johan@herland.net> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Cc: Git List , Junio C Hamano To: Giuseppe Bilotta X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sun Feb 07 23:57:43 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 1NeG4U-0002Jn-SJ for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Sun, 07 Feb 2010 23:57:43 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756223Ab0BGW5h (ORCPT ); Sun, 7 Feb 2010 17:57:37 -0500 Received: from smtp.getmail.no ([84.208.15.66]:47895 "EHLO get-mta-out02.get.basefarm.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755970Ab0BGW5g (ORCPT ); Sun, 7 Feb 2010 17:57:36 -0500 Received: from smtp.getmail.no ([10.5.16.4]) by get-mta-out02.get.basefarm.net (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 7.0-0.04 64bit (built Jun 20 2008)) with ESMTP id <0KXH009FKUFZ0930@get-mta-out02.get.basefarm.net> for git@vger.kernel.org; Sun, 07 Feb 2010 23:57:35 +0100 (MET) Received: from alpha.localnet ([84.215.68.234]) by get-mta-in02.get.basefarm.net (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 7.0-0.04 64bit (built Jun 20 2008)) with ESMTP id <0KXH00AOSUFOKZ30@get-mta-in02.get.basefarm.net> for git@vger.kernel.org; Sun, 07 Feb 2010 23:57:35 +0100 (MET) X-PMX-Version: 5.5.3.366731, Antispam-Engine: 2.7.0.366912, Antispam-Data: 2010.2.7.224233 User-Agent: KMail/1.12.4 (Linux/2.6.32-ARCH; KDE/4.3.4; x86_64; ; ) In-reply-to: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Sunday 07 February 2010, Giuseppe Bilotta wrote: > Hello all, > > ok, this may sound a little odd especially with the 'notes vs > metadata' thread going on, but I was wondering: do we store _any_ kind > of metadata _about_ the notes themselves? If I'm reading the code > correctly, we have neither author nor date information about the notes > themselves, so we don't know who added them or when. Is it too late to > suggest that this kind of metadata be added to notes? Making them > full-blown commit-style objects is probalby overengineered and wrong > under many points of view (not to mention probably incompatible with > current storage), but maybe we can set up a convention that notes > SHOULD be in pseudo-mbox format? This would mean that when a note is > created, the template starts with a 'From ' line including the user's > name & email and note creation date; when editing, the note is again > augmented with the new author name email and date. Of course the users > are then free do expunge the From lines if they don't want it (just > commenting it would be enough, of course). How does the idea sound? NAK Notes are stored in a notes tree that is changed by making commits on the notes ref (see commit_notes() in builtin-notes.c in 'pu'). The commits on the notes ref are regular commits with the usual commit metadata (author, date, etc.), so if you're interested in who/when a given note was written, you can simply point 'git (gui) blame' at the notes tree. ...Johan -- Johan Herland, www.herland.net