From: Jon Seymour Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2005 22:28:58 GMT Subject: Re: Stacked GIT 0.1 (a.k.a. quilt for git) Message-ID: <2cfc4032050617152878b75c97@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: > > I think it would worth exploring defining a git type for patches and > storing the patches inside git as well. Then a commit could identify the > patch it applies (when it is from applying a patch), and a rebased patch > could reference the patch it replaces, and then (with a certain amount of > handwaving of implementation) the system could notice when the patch > you're pushing got applied upstream. Or, at least, git could avoid > throwing away the history information when it goes through patches. I keep > thinking that this would be an important feature, but I haven't got the > familiarity with quilt to know how it should work. > I also think it would be good if patches extracted from git repositories included some information about exactly where the patch was extracted from...something like... signed-off-by: Name --- commit: sha1 -> sha1 tree: sha1 -> sha1 The reason for including the commits is to allow the maintainer to track exactly where the a given rev of a patch was from. The reason for including the treeids is to allow appliers to verify that the patch has produced the same result as the patch submitter.