From: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>
Date: Mon, 09 May 2005 17:27:57 GMT
Subject: Re: History messup
Message-ID: <1115659677.16187.393.camel@hades.cambridge.redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <1115657971.19236.33.camel@tglx>

On Mon, 2005-05-09 at 16:59 +0000, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> David merged from Linus repository . Linus synced later with David.
> Linus did not create a new commit for this update and just pointed his
> "HEAD" to Davids "HEAD", which means he forked Davids repository at
> this point.
> 
> Due to that the parent->parent history is not longer unique. This
> makes it impossible to do file revision graphs over the various
> repositories in the correct order.
> 
> Is this a unique problem or is the omission of a commit in cases like
> that usual practice ? In the latter case proper history tracking is
> almost impossible.

It's normal practice, and it _has_ to be the case. Otherwise the trees
would never stabilise -- every time Linus pulled from my tree he would
create a merge-commit which I don't yet have, and vice versa.

Unless a commit also carries a unique repo-id identifying the repository
in which it originally occurred, you'll only ever be able to track
history in the way people want by means of heuristics.

-- 
dwmw2