git.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ryan Anderson <ryan@michonline.com>
To: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] Applying a graft to a tree and "rippling" the changes through the history
Date: Sun, 06 Nov 2005 21:22:33 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <436EBA69.6000900@michonline.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7vll01ut6j.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1805 bytes --]

Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Ryan Anderson <ryan@michonline.com> writes:
> 
> 
>>I've written a tool that will take a single commit, add it as a parent
>>of another commit, and recreate the history above that second commit in
>>a fully compatible manner.
> 
> 
> I think the procedure is reproducible, which is a very nice
> property to have for a tool like this, but I am not sure what
> you mean by "in a fully compatible manner".  What are you
> compatible with?

Well, what I meant was, "It creates a history that is purely a superset
of the old history, so merges should work cleanly from the pre-graft
subhistory to the fully merged history."

But clearly I was too ... terse.

IOW, this should work perfectly, assuming neither tree has been pulled
into since the history was merged into historical-graft tree:

$ cd linux-head
$ git branch -b ryan-hacking HEAD
$ quilt push -a
$ git commit -a -m "Apply quilt tree"

$ cd ../linux-historical-graft/
$ git pull ../linux-historical-graft/

> Also another rhetorical, tongue-in-cheek question.  What is your
> plan to ripple the graft through to update signed tags?  ;-)

:) Well, since I can't resist answering your rhetorical question:

They signed a specific DAG.  I'm providing a richer, more complete DAG
that is a pure-superset of the one they signed.  It is not, however,
equivalent, so their signature is not related to the superset DAG I have
created.  In practice, however, I don't expect that any tag-signers
would state that there is a meaningful difference between the two DAGs,
from the perspective of their signature.

FYI - I don't think merging the trees like this is a good idea, from the
perspective of something like gitk - gitk took long enough to startup
and display something on my merged tree here that I gave up and killed
it off.


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 256 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2005-11-07  2:22 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2005-11-06 22:38 [RFC] Applying a graft to a tree and "rippling" the changes through the history Ryan Anderson
2005-11-06 22:43 ` Randal L. Schwartz
2005-11-07  1:45 ` Junio C Hamano
2005-11-07  2:22   ` Ryan Anderson [this message]
2005-11-18  8:49   ` Matthias Urlichs

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=436EBA69.6000900@michonline.com \
    --to=ryan@michonline.com \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=junkio@cox.net \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).