Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes: >> Why? >> >> The tree you are writing out that way look very different from what is >> recorded in the commit object. What's the point of introducing confusion >> by allowing many tarballs with different contents written from the same >> commits with such tweaks all labelled with the same pax header? > > See my later message. I think it depends on how the embedded id is used. > Is it to say "this represents the tree of this git commit"? Or is it to > help people who later have a tarball and have no clue which commit it > might have come from? People, who have no clue which part of the subtree was extract and what leading path was added, would still have to wonder where the tree came from even with the embedded id. Without your patch, if the tarball has an embedded id, wouldn't they at least be able to assume it is the whole thing of that commit? If you label a randomly mutated tree with the same label, you cannot tell the genuine one from manipulated ones. Not that I have strong opinions on this, either, but that is what I meant by "_introducing_" confusion. -- 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