From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jakub Narebski Subject: Re: Change set based shallow clone Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2006 11:49:13 +0200 Organization: At home Message-ID: References: <9e4733910609071923tf1c49f6o70419e961e9eb66f@mail.gmail.com> <17666.13716.401727.601933@cargo.ozlabs.ibm.com> <7vpse4uzos.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <7virjwuxrz.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sun Sep 10 11:49:09 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GMLw1-0004I2-09 for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Sun, 10 Sep 2006 11:49:05 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932067AbWIJJs4 convert rfc822-to-quoted-printable (ORCPT ); Sun, 10 Sep 2006 05:48:56 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750844AbWIJJs4 (ORCPT ); Sun, 10 Sep 2006 05:48:56 -0400 Received: from main.gmane.org ([80.91.229.2]:2245 "EHLO ciao.gmane.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750839AbWIJJsz (ORCPT ); Sun, 10 Sep 2006 05:48:55 -0400 Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1GMLvj-0004DR-17 for git@vger.kernel.org; Sun, 10 Sep 2006 11:48:47 +0200 Received: from host-81-190-21-28.torun.mm.pl ([81.190.21.28]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sun, 10 Sep 2006 11:48:47 +0200 Received: from jnareb by host-81-190-21-28.torun.mm.pl with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sun, 10 Sep 2006 11:48:47 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: git@vger.kernel.org X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: host-81-190-21-28.torun.mm.pl Mail-Copies-To: jnareb@gmail.com User-Agent: KNode/0.10.2 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Junio C Hamano wrote: > I am starting to suspect that introducing "generation" header to > the commit objects might actually be a very good thing. =A0For > one thing, rev-list will automatically get the topology always > right if we did so. >=20 > We obviously need to update 'convert-objects' and tell everybody > that they need to rewrite their history if we take this route. > That kind of flag-day conversion used to be an Ok thing to do, > but it is getting harder and harder these days for obvious > reasons, though. Wouldn't it be possible to have not that more complex code if some of the commit objects (newer) would have "generation" header, and some of them (older) wouldn't have it? Git would use generation header if it= is present, and current heuristic timestamp based code if it is not presen= t. It would be better of course if the new commits have correct "generatio= n" header, so insertion of "new" commit after "old" commit would have some extra overhead... --=20 Jakub Narebski Warsaw, Poland ShadeHawk on #git