Re: GTP/0.1 terminology 101: commit reels and references

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Jul 28, 2008, 07:24 UTC
Message-ID: <7vk5f6tqsj.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org>
In-Reply-To: <1217228570.6750.24.camel@maia.lan>

Sam Vilain <sam@vilain.net> writes:

Show 6 quoted lines

>>   Commit reels can also, and generally do, include the objects required
>>  for a specific commit.
>
> Yes.  The only times where they wouldn't contain all the objects
> required for the commits within the reel, is when those objects happened
> to be contained by a previous reel.

What do you mean by "previous" reel? It is not quite defined in your message but perhaps defined elsewhere?

How is this different from a bundle? Does a reel, unlike a bundle, contain the full tree for the bottom commits?

> This is one of the design decisions which I think may be a mistake; a
> less expensive to calculate definition of a reel would be *all* objects
> between the starting and ending Reference objects.

Do you mean all such objects and nothing else? That would imply that a reel is quite similar to a bundle (but neither rev-list --objects-edge nor bundle guarantees that the result is minimal).