From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Johannes Sixt Subject: Re: RFC: grafts generalised Date: Thu, 03 Jul 2008 09:42:45 +0200 Message-ID: <486C82F5.6080405@viscovery.net> References: <20080702143519.GA8391@cuci.nl> <37fcd2780807021019t76008bbfq265f8bf15f59c178@mail.gmail.com> <37fcd2780807021058r5ed820cfmdc98f98f36d5c8ae@mail.gmail.com> <20080702181021.GD16235@cuci.nl> <486C6B8E.5040202@viscovery.net> <20080703073041.GA28566@cuci.nl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Dmitry Potapov , git@vger.kernel.org To: "Stephen R. van den Berg" X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Jul 03 10:27:48 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1KEK9z-0002yW-9a for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Thu, 03 Jul 2008 10:27:23 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756655AbYGCIVG (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Jul 2008 04:21:06 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755612AbYGCITY (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Jul 2008 04:19:24 -0400 Received: from lilzmailso01.liwest.at ([212.33.55.23]:41494 "EHLO lilzmailso01.liwest.at" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S937020AbYGCHmr (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Jul 2008 03:42:47 -0400 Received: from cm56-163-160.liwest.at ([86.56.163.160] helo=linz.eudaptics.com) by lilzmailso01.liwest.at with esmtpa (Exim 4.66) (envelope-from ) id 1KEJSn-0007tc-IL; Thu, 03 Jul 2008 09:42:45 +0200 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (J6T.linz.viscovery [192.168.1.42]) by linz.eudaptics.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F50F54D; Thu, 3 Jul 2008 09:42:45 +0200 (CEST) User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728) In-Reply-To: <20080703073041.GA28566@cuci.nl> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.5 X-Spam-Score: 1.7 (+) X-Spam-Report: ALL_TRUSTED=-1.8, BAYES_99=3.5 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Stephen R. van den Berg schrieb: > Actually, ripple-through changes are rare. In the current project it > seems I need exactly one, but it's buried deep in the past (sadly). > The reason why I need it, is to make sure that git-bisect will work for > any revision in the past (i.e. the tree contained/contains some > too-clever-for-their-own-good $Revision$-expansion dependencies) But you do know that you don't need to apply the change *now*; you can apply it at bisect-time? Unless you expect you or your mere mortal coworkers are going to do dozens of bisects into that part of the history, I wouldn't change history *like*this*. But of course, I don't understand the circumstances enough, so... just my 2 cents. -- Hannes