Re: Storing (hidden) per-commit metadata

From: Dmitry Potapov <dpotapov@gmail.com>
Date: Feb 22, 2010, 11:28 UTC
Message-ID: <20100222112845.GE10191@dpotapov.dyndns.org>
In-Reply-To: <1266832607.31769.37.camel@ganieda>

On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 10:56:47AM +0100, Jelmer Vernooij wrote:

Show 6 quoted lines

> 
> There is no need for that data to be added later for revisions that did
> not originate from Bazaar. All of the metadata that has to be stored
> will be known at the time the commit is created. Those commits that were
> made in Git later will not have any metadata that can not be represented
> in Git (they were made with Git, after all).

If so, I do not see why any metadata should be stored in Git at all. If you can work without them then why do you want to add to Git? And then how about commit that originated in Git then exported to Bazaar and then imported back at Git? It is still originated in Git and thus should not have any metadata despite being imported from Bazaar.

Show 5 quoted lines

> Having a bzr/master ref means that the extra metadata will not always be
> copied around (unless git is patched), so if I push my work from Bazaar
> into Git, somebody works on it in Git and pushes a derived branch and
> then somebody else clones that derived Git branch into Bazaar again, I
> will not be able to communicate with that person's branch.

No matter how many times a branch was cloned, it is exactly same branch (i.e. it consists of commits having exactly the same id). So, if you can work with the original branch, you can work with any cloned branch. So, I see no need to copy this data around for people who do not work with Bazaar directly.

Dmitry