Re: [Q] Abbreviated history graph?

From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Nov 3, 2008, 20:15 UTC
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.00.0811031211180.3419@nehalem.linux-foundation.org>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.2.00.0811031129060.3419@nehalem.linux-foundation.org>

On Mon, 3 Nov 2008, Linus Torvalds wrote:

Show 6 quoted lines

>
> I'll post a simple series of four commits in a moment. They're all 
> trivial, and the first three are just setting stuff up (in fact, the very 
> first one is a commit I've already posted, and it's technically totally 
> unrelated, but since it touches the same area as one of the other ones, 
> I'm too lazy to try to separate it out).

Side note: it's certainly possible that we could improve on this. Right now, "--simplify-namespace" will totally override any path simplification, so you can't get a combination of pathnames _and_ naming commits. I don't know exactly what the rules should be, but I could imagine that we could do something like:

 - if no pathnames are given, work the way the current patch-series works.

 - if path-names are given, make rev_compare_tree() truen 
   REV_TREE_DIFFERENT if a name decoration _or_ a tree difference exists.

Anyway, that's a fairly trivial extension to the idea, and doesn't really matter for the basic code. It can easily be left for later.

		Linus