On Sun, 17 Apr 2005, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Sun, 17 Apr 2005, Daniel Barkalow wrote:
> > Any comment on the design, or should I send my implementation?
> Show the patches, and maybe I (and others) can make comments on the
> thing.. It doesn't sound broken by design, the only question is how much
> harder (if any) it is to use than the rather trivial "revision.h" which
> gets us really small files.
I don't think it's much different in difficulty, plus it handles more
(parsing the objects more completely). They'll follow.
> In particular, is there some easy way to walk backwards by time? "git log"
> definitely needs that, and merge-base clearly wants something similar. I
> also pretty much guarantee that visualization tools want that - creating a
> visual representation of the dag by time.
I think that should be easy, although I haven't written code to do it. If
you output the whole history, sorted by date, you obviously need to get
the whole history, but I expect people will have some sort of pruning to
keep it down to a size they care about.
> But if there are simple helper functions to get the "next backwards in
> time" case (by looking at the parent dates in a merge), then that should
> be ok to do incrementally.
Haven't written that yet, but I can do so.
*This .sig left intentionally blank*
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