From: Dmitry Ivankov <divanorama@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 18 Sep 2011 20:59:56 GMT
Subject: Re: [RFC] fast-import: note deletion command
Message-ID: <CA+gfSn9CsL4tz30B62mDzALdyy1RTFiRT4a1zdJ8pR8aTdcpXA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAGdFq_hpA95Kj4eMr4e1duuXTpr+OkkwF4K5bTapXEi9UjWcSA@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 2:39 AM, Sverre Rabbelier <srabbelier@gmail.com> wrote:
> Heya,
>
>>
>> If I were doing it:
>>
>>  - advertise "N 0{40} <commit>" as the historical way to delete a
>>   note, and make sure it keeps working
>>
>>  - introduce 'ND' or 'notedelete <commit>' as a human-friendly
>>   synonym, keeping in mind that NC and NR could be introduced in the
>>   future if there is demand for them.
>
> Is this perhaps a good moment to also think about branch deletion?
> That came up earlier as well, and thinking about that might give us
> some insights in how to deal with deletions uniformly.
Also maybe marks deletion, getting mark sha1,  resetting a mark with
explicit sha1. But most probably not tags deletion.

And going much further on commands, following look nice to have:
- 'ls' storing result to a mark (to allow us not to compute sha1/store
  object if we don't want to)
- marks namespaces (to keep ls mark separately, mark deletion will
  do too, if it's only a single temporary mark). Maybe like ::nr:mark.

>
> --
> Cheers,
>
> Sverre Rabbelier
>