Re: Git commit generation numbers

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

 



On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 10:06 PM, Linus Torvalds
<torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 11:34 AM, Jakub Narebski <jnareb@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> That is IF unknown headers are copied verbatim during rebase.  For
>> "encoding" header this is a good thing, for "generation" it isn't.
>
> Afaik, they aren't copied verbatim, and never have been. Afaik, the
> only thing that has *ever* written commits is "commit_tree()"
> (originally "main()" in commit-tree.c). Why is this red herring even
> being discussed?
>
> Of course you can always generate bogus commits by writing them by
> hand. But that's irrelevant.

Let's suppose for a moment that the commits do have these wrong
generation numbers, shouldn't a fetch on the newer client check these
and show an error? But what if they are pushed to a central server
that has old version of git? It would be messy.

-- 
Felipe Contreras
--
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


[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]