git/list[1] front-page[2] threads[3] people[4] search[5] about
 

Re: [PATCH 0/4] Re: cherry-pick and 'log --no-walk' and ordering

From
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date
Aug 13, 2012, 07:26 UTC
Message-ID
<7vd32vfe24.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
In-Reply-To
<7vhas7fefs.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes:
> Would anything break if we take your patch, but without two
> possibilities to revs->no_walk option (i.e. we never sort under
> no_walk)?

By the way, by "would anything break", I do not just mean if our existing tests trigger failures from "test_expect_success"; I suspect some do assume the sorting behaviour. I am wondering if the sorting makes sense in the real users; in other words, if the failing tests, if any, are expecting sensible and useful behaviour.

After all, the sorting by the commit timestamp is made solely to optimize the limit_list() which wants to traverse commits ancestry near the tip of the history, and sorting by the commit timestamp is done because it is usually a good and quick approximation for topological sorting.

Previous: Junio C HamanoNext: Martin von Zweigbergk
Message 7 of 37 in “cherry-pick and 'log --no-walk' and ordering”
  1. Martin von ZweigbergkAug 10, 2012
  2. Junio C HamanoAug 10, 2012
  3. Martin von ZweigbergkAug 11, 2012
  4. Junio C HamanoAug 11, 2012
  5. 0/4 Re: cherry-pick and 'log --no-walk' and orderingy@google.com, Aug 13, 2012
  6. Junio C HamanoAug 13, 2012
  7. Junio C HamanoAug 13, 2012
  8. Martin von ZweigbergkAug 13, 2012
  9. Junio C HamanoAug 13, 2012
  10. Martin von ZweigbergkAug 13, 2012
  11. Junio C HamanoAug 13, 2012
  12. Martin von ZweigbergkAug 13, 2012
  13. 0/3 revision (no-)walking in orderMartin von Zweigbergk, Aug 29, 2012
  14. 1/3 teach log --no-walk=unsorted, which avoids sortingMartin von Zweigbergk, Aug 29, 2012
  15. Dan JohnsonAug 29, 2012
  16. Junio C HamanoAug 29, 2012
  17. 2/3 demonstrate broken 'git cherry-pick three one two'Martin von Zweigbergk, Aug 29, 2012
  18. Junio C HamanoAug 30, 2012
  19. 3/3 cherry-pick/revert: respect order of revisions to pickMartin von Zweigbergk, Aug 29, 2012
  20. Junio C HamanoAug 29, 2012
  21. Martin von Zweigbergk has a new e-mail addressMartin von Zweigbergk, Aug 29, 2012
  22. 1/4 teach log --no-walk=unsorted, which avoids sortingy@google.com, Aug 13, 2012
  23. 2/4 revisions passed to cherry-pick should be in "default" ordery@google.com, Aug 13, 2012
  24. Junio C HamanoAug 13, 2012
  25. Martin von ZweigbergkAug 13, 2012
  26. Junio C HamanoAug 13, 2012
  27. Martin von ZweigbergkAug 15, 2012
  28. Junio C HamanoAug 15, 2012
  29. Martin von ZweigbergkAug 15, 2012
  30. Junio C HamanoAug 15, 2012
  31. Martin von ZweigbergkAug 15, 2012
  32. Martin von ZweigbergkAug 13, 2012
  33. Junio C HamanoAug 13, 2012
  34. 3/4 cherry-pick/revert: respect order of revisions to picky@google.com, Aug 13, 2012
  35. 4/4 cherry-pick/revert: default to topological sortingy@google.com, Aug 13, 2012
  36. Junio C HamanoAug 13, 2012
  37. Junio C HamanoAug 13, 2012

Read the whole thread, see it on lore, or plain text.

$ cat FOOTERMessages come from the public archive at lore.kernel.org/git, fetched every hour. The front page is chosen and written each morning by an AI editor and can be wrong; the threads themselves are the record. About and API. For agents: an MCP server at https://gitlist.dev/mcp, and any thread, story or person page as Markdown by adding .md to its URL (or sending Accept: text/markdown). Details in /llms.txt.