From: D Herring <dherring@tentpost.com>
To: git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: idea: git "came from" tags
Date: Sun, 17 Jan 2010 23:22:02 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <hj0nl9$uds$2@ger.gmane.org> (raw)
Actors:
- public "upstream" repository
- public "local" repository
- end users tracking both
Situation:
- local starts by tracking upstream
- local makes changes, commits, and sends upstream
- users now tracking local ahead of upstream
- upstream makes modified commits
- local satisfied, wants to reset master to upstream/master
Problem:
- A merge will perpetually leave two parallel branches. Even though
there are no longer any diffs, local/master cannot use the same
objects as upstream/master.
- A hard reset lets local/master return to sharing objects with
upstream/master; but this may break pulls or cause other problems for
users.
Proposed solution:
- Local adds a "came from" tag to upstream/master, leaves a tag on the
head of local/master, and does a hard reset from local/master to
upstream/master. When a user tracking local/master does a pull, their
client detects a non-fast-forward, finds the came-from tag, and treats
it as a fast-forward.
Basically, this is a protocol to glue a "strategy ours" merge onto an
existing tree. This way local can cleanly track upstream, with no
added complexity in the nominal (no local changes) case.
Example:
Without this addition, local/master looks something like
u1 - u2 - u3 - u4 - u5 - u6 ...
\- l1 - l2\+ m1 - \+ m2\+ m3 ...
With this addition, local/master looks like
u1 - u2 - u3(tcf) - u4 - u5 - u6 ...
\- l1 - l2 - t0
where
* u# = upstream changes
* l# = local changes
* m# = local merges (m1=u3, m2=u5, m3=u6, ...)
* the tcf tag points to t0, and t0 tags the end of the local mods
Pseudo-shell-code addition to git-pull:
fetch local/master
fast_forward=usual test whether local/master contains user/master
if test $fast_forward = no
then
for tag in $fetched_tags # something like this or git-describe
do
if is_came_from($tag) && (came_from($tag) contains user/master)
then
fast_forward=yes
break
fi
done
fi
Comments? I think this is completely implementable (though I'm not
well-versed in git internals). Since it only triggers during
non-fast-forward operations, it should have negligible performance impact.
Of course, it would be even better if somebody shows me how to do this
with the current tools. Maybe I'm just doing it all wrong.
Thanks,
Daniel
next reply other threads:[~2010-01-18 4:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-01-18 4:22 D Herring [this message]
2010-01-18 9:49 ` idea: git "came from" tags Michael J Gruber
2010-01-19 5:02 ` D Herring
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='hj0nl9$uds$2@ger.gmane.org' \
--to=dherring@tentpost.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).