Re: [PATCH] Additional merge-base tests

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@xxxxxx> writes:

> We could introduce a time.maximumSkew variable, and just walk only 
> that much further when traversing the commits.

We could have had "commit generation number" in the commit
object header, and use that instead of commit timestamps for
these traversal purposes.  The generation number for a commit is
defined to be max(generation number of its parents)+1 and we
prime the recursive this definition by defining the generation
number for the root commit to be one.  A moral equivalent
alternative would be to notice that the commit timestamp we are
going to use to create for a new commit is smaller than one of
the commit timestamps of its parent commits and adjust the
commit timestamp in such a case by git-commit-tree, perhaps with
a warning.

These are pretty much water under the bridge by now, for two
reasons.  One is that I think it is better to make the tools
that use get_merge_bases() prepared for the case the function
includes suboptimal bases anyway, and the other is once we do
that this is not a strong enough justification to modify the
commit object format.

-
: 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

[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]