From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: ** X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.176.0/21 X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.6 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INVALID_MSGID,MSGID_FROM_MTA_HEADER, MSGID_NOFQDN1,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,UNPARSEABLE_RELAY shortcircuit=no autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: (qmail 6236 invoked by uid 111); 28 Jun 2008 01:09:21 -0000 Received: from vger.kernel.org (HELO vger.kernel.org) (209.132.176.167) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.32) with ESMTP; Fri, 27 Jun 2008 21:09:14 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753360AbYF1BJJ (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 Jun 2008 21:09:09 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753034AbYF1BJI (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 Jun 2008 21:09:08 -0400 Received: from w2.willowmail.com ([64.243.175.54]:33147 "HELO w2.willowmail.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1752622AbYF1BJI (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 Jun 2008 21:09:08 -0400 Received: (qmail 32069 invoked by uid 90); 28 Jun 2008 01:08:58 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: "David Jeske" To: "Robert Anderson" Cc: "Jakub Narebski" , git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: An alternate model for preparing partial commits X-Mailer: Willow v0.02 Date: Sat, 28 Jun 2008 00:22:23 -0000 Message-ID: Received: from 67.188.42.104 at Sat, 28 Jun 2008 00:22:23 -0000 References: <9af502e50806271555j3cd06ecau122b11217f612217@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <9af502e50806271555j3cd06ecau122b11217f612217@mail.gmail.com> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org -- Robert Anderson wrote: > Possibly a succinct way of moving this conversation forward is to say that: > > What is desired is a workflow where partial commits can be tested, > when it is desirable not to change history. Why don't we just make a model where history changes are handled safetly? Then we don't have to be afraid to publish DAGs we may want to change later.