From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Johannes Schindelin Subject: Re: git-rerere observations and feature suggestions Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2008 11:24:35 +0100 (BST) Message-ID: References: <20080616110113.GA22945@elte.hu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Junio C Hamano To: Ingo Molnar X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Jun 17 12:27:30 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 1K8YPF-0005CB-JG for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Tue, 17 Jun 2008 12:27:17 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754579AbYFQK0P (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Jun 2008 06:26:15 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754425AbYFQK0O (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Jun 2008 06:26:14 -0400 Received: from mail.gmx.net ([213.165.64.20]:55986 "HELO mail.gmx.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1754558AbYFQK0N (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Jun 2008 06:26:13 -0400 Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 17 Jun 2008 10:26:12 -0000 Received: from almond.st-and.ac.uk (EHLO almond.st-and.ac.uk) [138.251.155.241] by mail.gmx.net (mp050) with SMTP; 17 Jun 2008 12:26:12 +0200 X-Authenticated: #1490710 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1/PxTgi88zPCdui0xdGeZKS8pcKpH9+3qziDm2ZNf gERo64a/4OGw2z X-X-Sender: gene099@racer In-Reply-To: <20080616110113.GA22945@elte.hu> User-Agent: Alpine 1.00 (DEB 882 2007-12-20) X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Hi, On Mon, 16 Jun 2008, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > - Sharing .git/rr-cache. It's quite a PITA to share the .git/rr-cache > amongst -tip maintainers right now. It seems to have dependencies on > the index file, so if we want to share the conflict resolution data, > we have to copy our index file (which is dangerous anyway and assumes > very similar repositories). I was dreaming about having "git rerere infer-from ". This would be - more versatile, as you do not have to ask the guy to share the cache, - would avoid transmitting lots of data that can be inferred from the data, - would avoid relying on the honesty of the person sharing the cache, and - it would put all license wieners^Wissues at rest. FWIW this is in my TODO list, but I am unlikely to get to it, least of all before 1.5.6 comes out. Ciao, Dscho