Re: git and bzr
- From
Aaron Bentley <aaron.bentley@utoronto.ca>
- Date
- Nov 28, 2006, 18:31 UTC
- Message-ID
- <456C809C.3050503@utoronto.ca>
- In-Reply-To
- <ekhrhi$g6t$1@sea.gmane.org>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Jakub Narebski wrote:
Show 15 quoted lines
>>I notice that blame has an option to limit the annotation to recent >>history. I can only assume that is for performance reasons. bzr >>annotate doesn't need a feature like that, because annotations are >>explicit in bzr's storage format. > > > But you don't have content movement tracking. > > >> I expect that even if we were to >>extend annotate to track content across files, it would still be so fast >>that we wouldn't need it. > > > I think not.
There's no question that determining content movement could involve opening a lot of revisions, but you wouldn't need to examine:
1. revisions that didn't alter any lines being examined 2. revisions that altered only the file in question 3. revisions with multiple parents, because any lines attributed to that merge will be the outcome of conflict resolution. (Other lines will be attributed to one of the parents)
I'll admit though, that when I was thinking of this, I was thinking of annotation-based merging, a scenario in which the number of lines being examined is typically extremely low.
Aaron -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFFbICL0F+nu1YWqI0RAhaXAJ9tqw/J17oKDV0nnuPlputs1PHBIgCghs6K q++u4Z9OFGwziUBsnW08y0U= =tmqe