sean wrote: > On Tue, 25 Apr 2006 04:34:36 -0400 > sean <seanlkml@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> If you're cherry-picking from a disposable branch, then you don't want to >> include a link to it in your new commit. Once you include the link, the >> source commit should be protected from pruning just like any other piece >> of history. Otherwise there's no way for fsck-objects to know if a >> missing >> object means corruption or not. So you need a way at commit time to >> request the explicit linkage. > > Actually this implies that anyone pulling just this branch would > potentially > also end up pulling large portions of other branches too. So maybe > making > them optional is The Right Thing. In which case, we'd just have to accept > these as weaker than the parentage links and fsck-objects et. al. would > have to tolerate such missing commits. Actually, this can be resolved using automatic history grafts to the remote repository we pulled from, if the commit is not present on local side (and removing graft when commit appears on local side). I was more concerned about size of repository required by keeping some parts of history which would be purged without those "related" links. But your concern (pulling) is more important. -- Jakub Narebski Warsaw, Poland - : send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html