Subject: Re: [RFC] [PATCH 0/5] Implement 'prior' commit object links (and other commit links ideas)

From: Jakub Narebski <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 20:24:38 +0200

Linus Torvalds wrote:

> On Tue, 25 Apr 2006, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>> 
>> The "track it with pull/push" thing is NOT one such thing, however much
>> you protest. We already _have_ that thing. It's called a "ref", and it's
>> really really easy to create anywhere in .git/refs/, and the tools
>> already know how to use it.

I agree(d) that tracking pull/push with extra commit header fields is not a
good example.
 
> Btw, there are other cases for that. For example, "parent" is a
> well-specified thing that actually has very clear and unambiguous meaning.

In single parent case, "parent" means that we modified tree pointed by the
parent. Multiple parent case suggests that we combined trees pointed by
parents, most probable by merge. I'd rather we not use parent for anything
else.

> And we had a much better proposals (in the sense that it had real
> suggested _meaning_ and semantics) over the last few months for things
> like sub-projects (trees that point to other commits)

Wasn't it commits pointing to other trees (or to commits)? "bind" field
proposal suggests it. And it could be implemented using 'X-*' "related"
headers in commit.

   related a0e7d36193b96f552073558acf5fcc1f10528917 bind linux-2.6

vs. proposed

   bind f6a8248420395bc9febd66194252fc9957b0052d linux/

-- 
Jakub Narebski
Warsaw, Poland