From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.176.0/21 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.5 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MSGID_FROM_MTA_HEADER,RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [RFC] Submodules in GIT Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2006 23:36:55 -0800 Message-ID: <7vr6vxxnc8.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> References: <20061120215116.GA20736@admingilde.org> <7v7ixp20za.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <7v4pstzmk5.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <20061121062753.GG20736@admingilde.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2006 07:37:31 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Linus Torvalds , git@vger.kernel.org Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GmQBz-000878-9h for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Tue, 21 Nov 2006 08:37:19 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S934216AbWKUHg5 (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Nov 2006 02:36:57 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S934262AbWKUHg5 (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Nov 2006 02:36:57 -0500 Received: from fed1rmmtao06.cox.net ([68.230.241.33]:53731 "EHLO fed1rmmtao06.cox.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S934216AbWKUHg4 (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Nov 2006 02:36:56 -0500 Received: from fed1rmimpo02.cox.net ([70.169.32.72]) by fed1rmmtao06.cox.net (InterMail vM.6.01.06.03 201-2131-130-104-20060516) with ESMTP id <20061121073656.URGK5465.fed1rmmtao06.cox.net@fed1rmimpo02.cox.net>; Tue, 21 Nov 2006 02:36:56 -0500 Received: from assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net ([68.5.247.80]) by fed1rmimpo02.cox.net with bizsmtp id pKd31V0011kojtg0000000; Tue, 21 Nov 2006 02:37:03 -0500 To: Martin Waitz Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Martin Waitz writes: > On Mon, Nov 20, 2006 at 04:10:50PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > >> However, if I recall correctly, it was rather nightmarish to >> make this also work for reachability traversal necessary for >> pack generation. It was painful enough even when the bind was >> at the commit level (which was way simpler to handle), but to do >> this the right way, the bind needs to be done at the tree level, >> and "rev-list --objects foo..bar" would need some way to limit >> the commit ancestry chain of subproject at the same time, by >> computing the commit ancestry of the embedded commits in the >> trees. > > This at least seems to work already. > The UNINTERESTING flag is recursively set for the submodule > commits while walking the object chain. I think that is fine as long as we somehow enforce the topology of submodule to be similar to the toplevel topology. Otherwise I suspect it leads to unintuitive behaviour. Suppose that the ancestry chain for the toplevel are A, A~1, A~2 and you asked for "A~2..A". A submodule is bound at tree "sub/" and suppose A:sub/ == B, A~1:sub/ == C, and A~2:sub/ == D. Now further suppose the ancestry chain for B, C and D are like this: o---C / \ ...o---o---D---B A naive implementation of "--objects A~2..A" would propagate UNINTERESTING to D and mark B and C unmarked. Would it however be reasonable to include commits marked as 'o'? I am not trying to be negative here, but just raising things that I did not think through when I tried to tackle it the last time...