Re: Possible --remove-empty bug

From: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Date: Mar 13, 2006, 05:41 UTC
Message-ID: <7v4q22ucio.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>
In-Reply-To: <7vlkvfw3px.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>

Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net> writes:

Show 10 quoted lines

> Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org> writes:
>
>> It's supposed to stop traversing the tree once a pathname disappears.
>
> Then what we should simplify is the parent commit that does not
> have those pathnames (i.e. remove parents from that parent
> commit).  In other words, currently the code removes the parent
> commit that makes the tree disappear, but we would want to keep
> that parent, remove the grandparents, and then mark the parent
> uninteresting.

Sorry, the last clause in the above comment is wrong, and does not describe what the code attached does.

It removes the grandparents from the parent, and leaves the parent still interesting. As a result, in your example:

    ... if you have

    where the pathname disappeared in "b"...

we would get this world view:

because when inspecting a and finding that "b" does not have any paths we are interested in, b loses all of its parents.