Re: [PATCH 11/32] rev-list: support --narrow-tree
- From
Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com>
- Date
- Aug 25, 2010, 22:11 UTC
- Message-ID
- <AANLkTimMGn9M9im2LdjYJkbg9QhUKq2a_4tRQEUoQM0c@mail.gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <AANLkTi=KBThiZ_FBUh0RfzLtP=YAtUPcx5PJW1q5OCd4@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, Aug 25, 2010 at 1:59 PM, Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com> wrote:
Show 18 quoted lines
> Hi,
>
> 2010/8/24 Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com>:
>> These options allow plumbing to access narrow tree traverse modes.
>> As a consequence, tests can now be written to test these modes.
>>
> <snip>
>> + if (!prefixcmp(arg, "--narrow-tree=")) {
>> + revs->narrow_prefix = arg + 14;
>> + revs->narrow_tree = 1;
>> + continue;
>> + }
>
> Seems somewhat non-gittish. Why not 'git rev-list --objects HEAD --
> <subtree_path>' rather than 'git rev-list --objects
> --narrow-tree=<subtree_path> HEAD'? (Was it due to the current bug in
> rev-list when specifying both --objects and paths? If so, that's
> addressed in the patch series I just sent.)Yeah probably because of the --object bug that I did not know. Anyway I still need "--narrow" signal because in my series, I would send all trees that are not found in parents' trees for merge commits. A requirement from remote merge.
Show 8 quoted lines
>> +cat <<EOF >merge.expected >> +0da28f8308e336bd4b2c26b61c7fc44e41a30e49 >> +7475cb8a389b36ce238b9ee6cbfdfa26a1b67e35 >> +af9c31c0e217154296d93d66b9a5a41892c7b321 >> +ba7a30916c792624a8372cb26da50f5594098222 >> +74a398027f0b59183db54ca8c67dc30b5aeed0ff t2 > > Is this right? Do you expect to see a t2 entry when filtering for t1/t12?
As I said above, if this "t2" is not seen in either parents, then it must be sent/traversed, unfortunately.
-- Duy