Re: [RFC?] Telling git about more complex relationships between commits (Was: Re: FFmpeg considering GIT)
- From
- Andy Parkins <andyparkins@gmail.com>
- Date
- May 4, 2007, 11:39 UTC
- Message-ID
- <200705041239.22300.andyparkins@gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <81b0412b0705040236w1d5f26bx8ac351ade2f4ea6a@mail.gmail.com>
On Friday 2007 May 04, Alex Riesen wrote:
> On 5/4/07, Johan Herland <johan@herland.net> wrote: > > 1. "Reverts": Mark a commit as reverting another commit. This could be
> These are completely useless after the first "git gc --prune" or "git
Agreed for the cherry pick (and the rebase), but the original of a revert won't be pruned - in fact it's almost certain that the original is a subset of the revert itself (otherwise the revert wouldn't have applied cleanly).
* --- * --- X --- * --- !X --- * --- *
See? X won't ever be pruned without !X having been pruned first.
It doesn't seem unreasonable to record in a machine readable manner that !X undid X. It might be useful to someone one day.
As for custom headers - it's a great idea; here's the one that would be most useful:
X-Git-SVN-ID: 9553f0bf-9b14-0410-a0b8-cfaf0461ba5b
That way git-svn wouldn't (necessarily) need to keep its .rev_db file, and it wouldn't need any special handling to allow the repository to be cloned.
Andy
-- Dr Andy Parkins, M Eng (hons), MIET andyparkins@gmail.com