On December 3, 2009 11:51:06 Oswald Buddenhagen wrote: > On Thu, Dec 03, 2009 at 01:30:07PM -0600, Ian Monroe wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 1:03 PM, Oswald Buddenhagen <[email protected]> wrote: > > > however, as i'm trying to make it really smart (trying to > > > reconstruct the real history from the push as far as possible), i'm > > > faced with some "interesting" problems, so it's taking a while ... > > > > Just work with one commit at-a-time, not sure it makes sense to > > respond to the whole push as an entity. > > well, that's exactly the problem. just commits (sha1s) make totally no > sense to a human, so they must be ascribed to particular branches. and > figuring that out when multiple branches are pushed at once is an > interesting discourse in graph theory when you consider that refs may be > aliases to (parts of) each other and can have branches and merges on the > way. this is admittedly a corner case, but it might become interesting > when something is "imported" which had extended life outside the main > repository. the simple case of a multi-branch push would be a fix in a > stable branch and an immediate forward-merge to master (of course this > has no chance to work in a highly contented monster repo, but is > realistic for smaller repos).
ah, yes... what happenes to a CCMAIL hook when the commit it was in is copied to another branch? moved to another location? or does git's magical tree structure take care of duplicates? well, I imagine we might still have a problem if, say, a plasmoid moves from playground to kdebase... the whole history of that plasmoid would appear all at once, right? -- This message brought to you by eevil bananas and the number 3. www.chani3.com
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Kde-scm-interest mailing list [email protected] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-scm-interest
