From: Sven Verdoolaege <skimo@kotnet.org>
Date: Thu, 01 Dec 2005 13:07:24 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH] gitk: add Update menu item.
Message-ID: <20051201130724.GV8383MdfPADPa@greensroom.kotnet.org>
In-Reply-To: <17294.58317.317337.145932@cargo.ozlabs.ibm.com>

On Thu, Dec 01, 2005 at 10:51:41PM +1100, Paul Mackerras wrote:
> I put this in although I'm not completely happy with it (though it is
> a good step in the right direction).

Thanks.  That's what it was meant to be (a step in the right direction).

> Why do we unset children and nchildren in the phase == updatecommits
> case?  Wouldn't it give the same result if we set ncleft to nchildren
> for each commit and then we didn't call updatechildren in
> finishcommits?  I think that would end up simpler.

Well, you probably know your own code better than I do,
but I'll have a look later.

> I tried removing some commits (using git reset --hard) and then doing
> selecting update from the menu, and it redrew everything, but the
> removed commits were still shown.

Hmmm...  I'll have look at this over the weekend (unless you beat
me to it).

> Also, what will happen if the user selects update while gitk is still
> drawing the graph?  I think that will cause havoc.  At _best_ we'll
> end up with a truncated list of commits AFAICS.  We need to make that
> robust.

Agreed.  I hadn't thought a user would do that, but that was just
my lack of imagination.

skimo