From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: git-archive and tar options Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2011 16:30:24 -0700 Message-ID: <7vwrfk1lv3.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> References: <20110714015656.GA20136@sigill.intra.peff.net> <4E1F2468.6080409@lsrfire.ath.cx> <20110714172718.GA21341@sigill.intra.peff.net> <7vei1s36bl.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> <20110714212502.GA29848@sigill.intra.peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: =?utf-8?Q?Ren=C3=A9?= Scharfe , Neal Kreitzinger , git@vger.kernel.org To: Jeff King X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Jul 15 01:30:32 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QhVMW-0006ae-Cs for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Fri, 15 Jul 2011 01:30:32 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932590Ab1GNXa1 (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Jul 2011 19:30:27 -0400 Received: from b-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com ([208.72.237.35]:55807 "EHLO smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932558Ab1GNXa0 (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Jul 2011 19:30:26 -0400 Received: from smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by b-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3EA3A4587; Thu, 14 Jul 2011 19:30:26 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=eJ2PQ7jcU/Qc54RnfGybdgP3QWo=; b=danEqC zwIWhM9SznohD0Z7//bj4iwRtTN2ddENi9aQm+4c3DoOqRaCNUN8gU9Jjr8O8IyZ D4Hf+N+a7DZKnUpEmAnoSa8LWCoAEMOzwya8p2js7dpr2Oqf9RduA5/TMyinO8q4 89gvJtdlXn9MVU2HABaKXK8F8rwJB4gwc9Trs= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=BhmG4gaglzWc6Bx3sZA1EQrobxxAzf4H vlKgIC7gzzVUCjgNIdWtx+tfnY7gGCrwtu+WogbzsOBIODgvhfuHLr3AriHRgeiU LvgGreC+r2Deoyzv+eZbdArdTh9d0gwpQFYZD+4P9xQOBjSj7fvC67Sm2eUdtg0N SaZnN2R0/AY= Received: from b-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by b-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 355D24586; Thu, 14 Jul 2011 19:30:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [76.102.170.102]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by b-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B837E4585; Thu, 14 Jul 2011 19:30:25 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <20110714212502.GA29848@sigill.intra.peff.net> (Jeff King's message of "Thu, 14 Jul 2011 17:25:02 -0400") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 407E157A-AE71-11E0-AC67-1DC62E706CDE-77302942!b-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Jeff King writes: >> Why? >> >> The tree you are writing out that way look very different from what is >> recorded in the commit object. What's the point of introducing confusion >> by allowing many tarballs with different contents written from the same >> commits with such tweaks all labelled with the same pax header? > > See my later message. I think it depends on how the embedded id is used. > Is it to say "this represents the tree of this git commit"? Or is it to > help people who later have a tarball and have no clue which commit it > might have come from? People, who have no clue which part of the subtree was extract and what leading path was added, would still have to wonder where the tree came from even with the embedded id. Without your patch, if the tarball has an embedded id, wouldn't they at least be able to assume it is the whole thing of that commit? If you label a randomly mutated tree with the same label, you cannot tell the genuine one from manipulated ones. Not that I have strong opinions on this, either, but that is what I meant by "_introducing_" confusion.