From: David Woodhouse Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 08:29:15 GMT Subject: Re: kernel.org now has gitweb installed Message-ID: <1114676955.12012.346.camel@baythorne.infradead.org> In-Reply-To: <20050428081005.GG8612@pasky.ji.cz> On Thu, 2005-04-28 at 10:10 +0200, Petr Baudis wrote: > Linus ASM (Anonymous Subsystem Maintainer) > > |------------------------. > A| |B > | | > | \-------------\ > | : | > \------------------------\ |E > C| |D | > | /-------------/ > | |F > /------------------------/ > > How would you show that? F E D C B A? F D C A E B? Let us assume that C and A were already in Linus' tree (and on our web page) yesterday. Thus, they should be last. The newly-pulled stuff should be first -- FEDBCA. I'd say "depth-first, remote parent first" but that would actually show show 'A' (as a parent of D) long before it shows C. Walking of remote parents should stop as soon as we hit a commit which was accessible through a more local parent, rather than as soon as we hit a commit which we've already printed. Maybe it should be something like depth- first, local parent first, but _reversed_? The latter is what the mailing list feeder does, but that has the advantage of being about to use 'rev-tree $today ^$yesterday' so we _know_ we're excluding the ones people have already seen. Hence I haven't really paid that much attention to getting the order strictly correct. (Yes, I know that strictly speaking, git has no concept of 'remote' or 'local' parents. But the ordering of the two parents in a Cogito merge or pull hasn't changed, has it?) -- dwmw2