* David Woodhouse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've been looking at tracking file revisions. One proposed solution
> was to have a separate revision history for individual files, with a
> new kind of 'filecommit' object which parallels the existing 'commit',
> referencing a blob instead of a tree. Then trees would reference such
> objects instead of referencing blobs directly.
>
> I think that introduces a lot of redundancy though, because 99% of the
> time, the revision history of the individual file is entirely
> reproducible from the revision history of the tree. It's only when
> files are renamed that we fall over -- and I think we can handle
> renames fairly well if we just log them in the commit object.
how about the following structure:
- tree_new --->
- tree_old ---> rename_commit -> blob
the rename_commit object just contains a pointer to the file content
blob. If a rename happens then the old tree references the rename_commit
object (instead of the blob), and the new tree references it too. This
way there's no need to list the rename via namespace means: if a tree
entry points to a rename_commit object then a rename happened and the
rename_commit object is looked up in the old tree to get the old name.
there's no redundancy caused by this method: only renames (which are
rare) go through the rename_commit redirection. (to speed up the lookup
the rename_commit object could cache the offset of the two names within
their tree objects.)
Ingo
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
