Re: [RFC] Applying a graft to a tree and "rippling" the changes through
- From
Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
- Date
- Nov 19, 2005, 01:21 UTC
- Message-ID
- <7vr79dcu0j.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>
- In-Reply-To
- <Pine.LNX.4.64.0511181705390.13959@g5.osdl.org>
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org> writes:
> I'm not convinced we ever really _need_ a pure "tree-to-tree" thing, > although you can always do that by creating an extra commit with no parent > and thus no history ;)
Nah, it is more like a commit object that records its tree and another tree as its parent ;-).
I do not think tree-to-tree thing is very useful and that is what I meant to say by "tree-to-tree is still stronger than necessary".
What is recorded as a "change" by darcs feels more like "This makes it to do Y instead of doing X", and it is not about tree-to-tree. I know David Roundy is lurking on this list; David, do you have any comment on this?