On Sun, 2005-04-17 at 18:16 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > Alternatively, you can have just the rev-tree cache of them. That's what > it was designed for (along with avoiding to have to read 60,000 commits).
Purely from a conceptual POV I'd be a little happier with the history just ending with a parent pointer to a commit object which is absent, rather than having commit objects which point to _trees_ which are absent. But I suppose I can't really justify that, and I'm not overly bothered about it either. The important thing to get right at this point is that the tree we all work with should refer to the history, regardless of how we choose to prune it. The current linux-2.6.git tree has a parentless commit for the 2.6.12-rc2 import, which is bad. We should start with Thomas' git tree representing the real history, and work from that. You don't even need to see his tree; you only need the final sha1 hash of the commit in his tree which matches 2.6.12-rc2, so you can use that as the 'parent' of the first change you import yourself. -- dwmw2 - 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
