git.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Josh Triplett <josh@freedesktop.org>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Cc: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>, git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] git-split: Split the history of a git repository by subdirectories and ranges
Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2006 12:27:49 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <453D17B5.6070203@freedesktop.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0610230846420.3962@g5.osdl.org>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2586 bytes --]

Linus Torvalds wrote:
> 
> On Mon, 23 Oct 2006, Josh Triplett wrote:
>>> I wonder if using "git-log --full-history -- $project" to let the core 
>>> side omit commits that do not change the $project (but still give you 
>>> all merged branches) would have made your job any easier?
>> I don't think it would.  We still need to know what commit to use as the
>> parent of any given commit, so we don't want commits in the log output
>> with parents that don't exist in the log output.  And rewriting parents
>> in git-log based on which revisions change the specified subdirectory
>> seems like a bad idea.
> 
> Umm.. You didn't realize that git log already _does_ exactly that?

No, I didn't, primarily because the git log output I've scrutinized most
carefully came from git log --pretty=raw, which doesn't rewrite parents
even when pointed at a subdirectory.

> You need to rewrite the parents in order to get a nice and readable 
> history, which in turn is needed for any visualizer. So git has long done 
> the parent rewriting in order to be able to do things like
> 
> 	gitk drivers/char
> 
> on the kernel.
>
> And yes, that's done by the core revision parsing code, so when you do
> 
> 	git log --full-history --parents -- $project
> 
> you do get the rewritten parent output (of course, it's not actually 
> _simplified_, so you get a fair amount of duplicate parents etc which 
> you'd still have to simplify and which don't do anything at all).
> 
> Without the "--full-history", you get a simplified history, but it's 
> likely to be _too_ simplified for your use, since it will not only 
> collapse multiple identical parents, it will also totally _remove_ parents 
> that don't introduce any new content.

Considering that git-split does exactly that (remove parents that don't
introduce new content, assuming they changed things outside the
subtree), that might actually work for us.  I just checked, and the
output of "git log --parents -- $project" on one of my repositories
seems to show the same sequence of commits as git log --parents on the
head commit printed by git-split $project (apart from the rewritten
sha1s), including elimination of irrelevant merges.

> So there are multiple levels of history simplification, and right now the 
> internal git revision parser only gives you two choices: "none" 
> (--full-history) and "extreme" (which is the default when you give a set 
> of filenames). 

I don't think we need any middle ground here; why might we want less
simplification?

- Josh Triplett



[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 252 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2006-10-23 19:27 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2006-09-27  8:05 [RFC] git-split: Split the history of a git repository by subdirectories and ranges Josh Triplett
2006-09-27 10:13 ` Junio C Hamano
2006-09-27 11:59   ` Andy Whitcroft
2006-09-27 19:08     ` Junio C Hamano
2006-09-27 19:31       ` Junio C Hamano
2006-10-23 10:17   ` Josh Triplett
2006-10-23 15:52     ` Linus Torvalds
2006-10-23 19:27       ` Josh Triplett [this message]
2006-10-23 19:50         ` Linus Torvalds
2006-10-23 20:07           ` Jakub Narebski
2006-10-23 20:52           ` Josh Triplett
2006-10-23 21:06             ` Linus Torvalds
2006-10-23 21:19               ` Linus Torvalds
2006-10-24 14:56           ` Johannes Schindelin
2006-10-24 15:19             ` Linus Torvalds
2006-10-25  0:10         ` Junio C Hamano
2006-10-25  0:19           ` Jakub Narebski
2006-10-25  1:59           ` Josh Triplett
2006-10-25  2:13             ` Junio C Hamano

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=453D17B5.6070203@freedesktop.org \
    --to=josh@freedesktop.org \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=junkio@cox.net \
    --cc=torvalds@osdl.org \
    /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).