Re: [PATCh] jit-trackdown

From: Daniel Barkalow <barkalow@iabervon.org>
Date: Apr 29, 2005, 21:40 UTC
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0504291730000.30848-100000@iabervon.org>
In-Reply-To: <7voebx4dyd.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>

On Fri, 29 Apr 2005, Junio C Hamano wrote:

> Have toilet side gitters reached a concensus (or semi-concensus)
> on how things under .git/ should be organized?  Is there a
> summary somewhere, something along the following lines?

I've made a proposal like the following:

.git/
  objects/    (traditional)
  refs/       Directories of hex SHA1 + newline files
    heads/    Commits which are heads of various sorts
    tags/     Tags, by the tag name (or some local renaming of it)
  info/       Other shared information
    remotes
  ...         Everything else isn't shared
  HEAD        Symlink to refs/heads/<something>

The plumbing doesn't care what you name heads or tags, but expects things to be in heads to be commit objects and tags to be tag objects (which can tag whatever).

AFAICT, there is general concensus that this is how things should be, but I haven't convinced Linus that the plumbing should know about anything other than objects/.

	-Daniel
*This .sig left intentionally blank*