Re: Git commit generation numbers

[Jeff King <peff@peff.net>]

On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 03:48:07PM -0400, Jeff King wrote:

> OK, so let's say we add generation headers to each commit. What happens
> next? Are we going to convert algorithms that use timestamps to use
> commit generations? How are we going to handle performance issues when
> dealing with older parts of history that don't have generations?
> 
> Again, those are serious questions that need answered. I respect that
> you think the lack of a generation header is a design decision that
> should be corrected. As I said before, I'm not 100% sure I agree, but
> nor do I completely disagree (and I think it largely boils down to a
> philosophical distinction, which I think you will agree should take a
> backseat to real, practical concerns). But it's not 2005, and we have a
> ton of history without generation numbers. So adding them now is only
> one piece of the puzzle.
> 
> What's your solution for the rest of it?

I just read some of your later emails to others in the thread. It seems
like your answer is "assume the timestamp-based limiting is good enough
for old history".

I'm OK with that. It obviously falls down in a few specific situations,
but certainly has not been an unbearable problem for the past 5 years.

-Peff