Re: [RFC/PATCH] commit-tree: bump MAX_PARENTS to 128

From: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Date: Feb 27, 2007, 15:46 UTC
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.63.0702271624000.22628@wbgn013.biozentrum.uni-wuerzburg.de>
In-Reply-To: <7virdnhpbt.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>

Hi,

On Tue, 27 Feb 2007, Junio C Hamano wrote:

Show 14 quoted lines

> Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:
> 
> > On Tue, Feb 27, 2007 at 12:16:42AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> >
> >> But as Shawn pointed out, Octopus makes bisect less (much less)
> >> efficient for the end users, I tend to think the current 16 is
> >> already insanely large.
> >
> > Did you look at my "why I need a huge octopus" description? Is there a 
> > better way to do it? Should I simply do a bunch of pair-wise merges? 
> > I'll almost certainly never bisect it,...
> 
> I hate having to compose this message because I know I will end up 
> saying negative things without offering anything constructive.

IMHO this discussion is anything but not constructive.

> I do not think bundling commits from unrelated multiple projects in one 
> commit (some people seem to have called this Hydra in the past) is a 
> good practice, regardless of size.

Yesterday, I kicked an idea around on IRC with Sam: Darcs does not have branches as we do. Sam was nice enough to show me a picture:

	http://utsl.gen.nz/git/hydra-vs-regular.png

For those poor souls stuck with a text terminal, it looks like this:

Right image:

A-B-C-D-E-F-G-H-I-J-K-L-M-N-O-P-Q-R-S-T-U-V-W-X-Y-Z-a-b-c-d-e

Left image:

A-B---------------------------------------------------------e
                                                            |
    C     F-G-H-I------------------------------------------/|
    |\    |                                                 |
    |  ---+-_   --J----------------------------------------/|
     \   /   --/                                            |
      D-E      \----K--------------------------------------/|
         \         \_                                       |
          \          -L------------------------------------/|
           \                                                |
            \           M----------------------------------/|
             \                                              |
              \               P-----_           Y----------/|
               \              |      \         /            |
                --------------+-------T-U-V-W-X---Z---b-c--/|
                             /        |  \           /     /
                          N-O   Q----/|   ----------a     d
                             \        |
                              ----R--/|
                                     /
                                    S

(Puh! Can you believe how much time such a picture takes?)

So, the right image is what it would look like of you just committed everything with Git, and the left image how it would look like with Darcs.

Now, I never have worked with Darcs, but I _could_ imagine that it would be useful for some workflows to generate the Darcs layout automatically from the Git layout. In that case, a _lot_ of parents should be allowed.

Ciao, Dscho