From: Matt Mackall Date: Tue, 03 May 2005 03:29:16 GMT Subject: Re: Mercurial 0.4b vs git patchbomb benchmark Message-ID: <20050503032916.GE22038@waste.org> In-Reply-To: On Mon, May 02, 2005 at 07:48:29PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > On Mon, 2 May 2005, Matt Mackall wrote: > > > > Umm.. I am _not_ calculating the SHA of the delta itself. That'd be > > silly. > > It's not silly. The delta is not the object I care about and its representation is arbitrary. In fact different branches will store different deltas depending on how their DAGs get topologically sorted. The object I care about is the original text, so that's the hash I store. > In other words, you need to hash the metadata too. Otherwise how do you > consistency-check the _collection_ of files? Well naturally, I hash the metadata too. For every change, there's a toplevel changeset hash that is the hash of the entire project state at that time. And it's all signable and so on. Just like git and just like Monotone. -- Mathematics is the supreme nostalgia of our time.