From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from dog.elm.relay.mailchannels.net (dog.elm.relay.mailchannels.net [23.83.212.48]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A9E711FE44D for ; Fri, 4 Apr 2025 16:08:10 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=pass smtp.client-ip=23.83.212.48 ARC-Seal:i=2; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1743782892; cv=pass; b=U0oE7Vw6ll6E98nno8dPM4y2HzImKn+Tq3k/AmbIg2oYUR4xelFAZRwZVVJRPD4BfL9tAMcq/tHpwaN4JmopgGRk2mOuSNc4auIiOSlMn8+jfg21QC9k+oswrtubV9YHF92VOoht43N3jO/E6J66NVnOAIZQhacJLplSKuJQPuQ= ARC-Message-Signature:i=2; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1743782892; c=relaxed/simple; bh=bv5Di4gSO9L7IOvzFvbM7SVdWz8+hsxQYk8qGIHxM4U=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=eqwcoB3RecMe3/nUhIEE0YwytoHTs5btuGUypoD1Q2zo3YrBHi1knrKitZebAq8wJ6JE4XqtekiGFZsP0VRS2E4Me4ye8HxNrXix4HDxg3cvqYoGdC6n0fybrvVBWfAxH/SqS2rv9FGD6SbgPp6gJmL6E0Osff4tTdBxXqzjwWU= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=2; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=cryptonector.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=cryptonector.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=cryptonector.com header.i=@cryptonector.com header.b=uL8OG7QH; arc=pass smtp.client-ip=23.83.212.48 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=cryptonector.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=cryptonector.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=cryptonector.com header.i=@cryptonector.com header.b="uL8OG7QH" X-Sender-Id: dreamhost|x-authsender|nico@cryptonector.com Received: from relay.mailchannels.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by relay.mailchannels.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4CEF9183A94; Fri, 4 Apr 2025 16:08:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pdx1-sub0-mail-a233.dreamhost.com (trex-1.trex.outbound.svc.cluster.local [100.125.203.154]) (Authenticated sender: dreamhost) by relay.mailchannels.net (Postfix) with ESMTPA id C3279183F34; Fri, 4 Apr 2025 16:08:03 +0000 (UTC) ARC-Seal: i=1; s=arc-2022; d=mailchannels.net; t=1743782883; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=umFCawrPARjam1nUkzyRHaEiFCyC3HC8MoltPBxOC5f37bvA55JzOj+XwIZFj9Sih6toel 3nswBO22vqvDNAVlhs+f71/UgKZtMrPOo+vuH/8KnNnH9/YWVoPEdDwIzliBsbCwvNmjbn XK/PyeSVJ0viM8O5upBM7ZUo1EMYRuTy26eqx2nnOtdMjjx+VGrsbEfJTleqNzIZXhOpw5 P2Z/cYxPp6hQbj/5SMaeP84uRqNa3DmLd3PKnKt7WjX8UClPk3vyQrvjaYSXrm0GfUS1+p c7FpA11HbU/jDhEcgNCivyxapy7ykTIthLlBrUOXonRa1+jdj9xX4BpoZbF0yg== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mailchannels.net; s=arc-2022; t=1743782883; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:dkim-signature; bh=3ECTl5s+vZfxkpehr9CmnQQuyg0IENpEEDz1h3tHmlE=; b=1SJQOHfHBbRiE0esDy45v8GDmIcyr1yDfuzry/27QSYI5NMRa29x0JvAnumxmjcfi1uSt4 E43MfEzEpuAMFvqR3yJ6GRcsjF/CpHXIbqc09YpNYREprqRYQ+3qkexlEG9H4HInPYDd0v LdKZbeYx5v8hy8D/ZVWaOH+r1MhdLNb2fffju7gSVPGTmlh1A0JsXFEf0GNvoFuhLRRRxL p4AdT3j0rRv3lNlTMOpRfVlLfaHDSHk/2wqvhYiyLJ7+eGZKFuGOf+Sd4PIKRH96iQ8GXc +4xVsOuQFR9umbwPRQm7jUyQwpoTWAWNPidkPJ2aPclssJrrmQ0ld7bFJXTcjA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; rspamd-6c88b8f79f-fqf6v; auth=pass smtp.auth=dreamhost smtp.mailfrom=nico@cryptonector.com X-Sender-Id: dreamhost|x-authsender|nico@cryptonector.com X-MC-Relay: Neutral X-MailChannels-SenderId: dreamhost|x-authsender|nico@cryptonector.com X-MailChannels-Auth-Id: dreamhost X-Print-Cooperative: 6770bd5962cd0572_1743782884086_3612418182 X-MC-Loop-Signature: 1743782884086:3989674027 X-MC-Ingress-Time: 1743782884086 Received: from pdx1-sub0-mail-a233.dreamhost.com (pop.dreamhost.com [64.90.62.162]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) by 100.125.203.154 (trex/7.0.3); Fri, 04 Apr 2025 16:08:04 +0000 Received: from ubby (syn-075-081-095-064.res.spectrum.com [75.81.95.64]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: nico@cryptonector.com) by pdx1-sub0-mail-a233.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4ZTk6B60gXzDg; Fri, 4 Apr 2025 09:08:02 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cryptonector.com; s=dreamhost; t=1743782883; bh=3ECTl5s+vZfxkpehr9CmnQQuyg0IENpEEDz1h3tHmlE=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Content-Type; b=uL8OG7QHXTEDkOV0q5KxVI22sqG40xw7cO/eFFVNzD8o61LfNuREn7peSVb9sha0L znZ9kVhQudu5kOu8/Kg67spN0K/jeqov+zJB6K62CfgMLSul9usK3QPLT+9vxe7wG5 8yahDF0UkCMnQJ0Qq9YitVqxA60xaicmVTfttKbxs0Y0yR7gccfsgboNvammyabbGR PcGe286liRBnUPa/UclIcPUAhIszDw4Qk4Gyivrgxe2idoxk+wNEgOP9SZ7EO76TOX WaXybywMlwXJhGS0vzAPHu+CKKROMN8NIoGTuf8ZmLCBHlNXke/Nx4L4nUHL1aGlrt cVMFFnOzdgoEQ== Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2025 11:08:00 -0500 From: Nico Williams To: Remo Senekowitsch Cc: Elijah Newren , Martin von Zweigbergk , Git Mailing List , Edwin Kempin , Scott Chacon , "philipmetzger@bluewin.ch" Subject: Re: Gerrit, GitButler, and Jujutsu projects collaborating on change-id commit footer Message-ID: References: Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Fri, Apr 04, 2025 at 09:41:24AM +0200, Remo Senekowitsch wrote: > I'll try to join some of our threads and summarize... please correct me > if you disagree with that summary (or I've left something out you think > is important). > > [...] +1. > When discussing the uniqueness of change-ids or lack thereof, I'd > like to introduce one more factor: At which point in time during the > development cycle a change-id is unique. Jujutsu users derive most > of the benefits of change-ids during active development. The use case > you find most important - tracking (forward- and) back-ports - happens > at a different time during development, when a change has been merged > to a public branch already. So I think there is no conflict at all. > Change-ids will naturally tend to be unique during active development > and once they are merged, whether the change-id stays unique or not > doesn't matter anymore for those active development use cases. We can > have our cake and eat it too. I think that's right. One more benefit of change IDs is that you can find a commit in a back-/forward-port and track it all the way to its very initial integration and its code review history, perhaps all the way to its very first version.