On Thursday 22 April 2010, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Johan Herland <johan@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> > Next, we will need to be somewhat careful about using "ls-tree", to
> > avoid needlessly unpacking subtrees that are identical between <ours>
> > and <theirs>.
>
> My mentioning of "ls-tree" is only about what needs to be done at the
> conceptual level. In practice, assuming that notes trees have mostly the
> same fan-out structure, you would run "diff-tree -r" of (base,ours) and
> (base,theirs) pair _without_ anything fancy like rename detection, and
> pick out pieces (one tree may have ab/cdx{36} while the other tree may
> have abcd/x{36} that are notes about the same object---you treat this as
> if it is a partial ls-tree output that pertains only to the different
> parts, and make canonical "list of annotated objects" by removing '/'.
Got it. Brilliant, and obvious, really, when I think about it...
> All of this is very specific to merging "notes" and normal "merge" does
> not even want to know about it; I don't think you can avoid doing this
> yourself without touching "merge" if you want to merge "notes" correctly.
Agreed. From your feedback, I now have a much clearer picture on how to
proceed. Thanks! :)
Have fun!
...Johan
--
Johan Herland, <johan@xxxxxxxxxxx>
www.herland.net
--
To unsubscribe from this list: 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