I just wanted to add that the way git support works right now is a bit
weird. I understand why it was done the way it is, since git diffs
show file hashes, but the file hash itself is not a revision and is
meaningless outside the context of a commit hash. So, ultimately, the
git support really should use the commit hash as the 'revision id'.
You don't get this in a simple git diff though, you need to run
something like git format-patch to get the commit.


On May 5, 5:25 am, Sebastien Douche <sdou...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 16:26, ccaughie <c.caug...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> > I just read up some more on how git works and I think I now understand
> > why the existing code works for git but not for Mercurial; git uses
> > individual IDs for every file whereas Mercurial only has revision IDs
> > for commits. So my original patch would fix Mercurial but probably
> > break git.
> > Here's a new patch that fixes Mercurial and shouldn't affect git.
> > Please let me know if this seems like a reasonable approach; if so
> > I'll submit it as a change.
> Hi Colin and Christian!
> The patch seems to work well. Christian, can you put this change for the rc2?
> Another question Christian, why it is not possible to add diff and
> parent diff directly in request creation?
> Cheers.
> --
> Sebastien Douche <sdou...@gmail.com>
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"reviewboard" group.
To post to this group, send email to reviewboard@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
For more options, visit this group at 

Reply via email to