Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 1:24 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> Now, computing this efficiently may not be trivial, as you would need N^2 >> reachability analysis when pulling in N commits. Among 2000 recent merges >> I sampled from the kernel history, 70+ pull in more than 1000 commits (the >> largest one d4bbf7e77 pulls in 21k commits). > > So I have to say, for my purposes, it not only might be inefficient, > but it can still be very misleading. > ... > (Admittedly, so it the shortlog we put in the merge, so that "you can > find it later in the git tree itself" not *that* great of an argument > - the real argument for me is that it doesn't matter what you count, > you'll not necessarily get the actual piece of information I care > about..). There is no way to mine "X pulled from Y" out of the topology if you allow fast-forward anywhere, so "I care about whom I pulled from" is something people need to give out of band. Your lieutenant may have fast-forwarded his history from his lieutenant's, or you may even be fast-forwarding your history from your lieutenant's, in which case you do not even have a merge commit to record that fact anyway. If you do not fast-forward, at least the merge subject would give you where you got the history from, so it is not like that the information *must* be obtained by looking at the history anyway (incidentally, that was the reason why the "better than random number generator but not by a large margin" version gives an extra weight to the tip commit you are pulling; unless your lieutenant fast-forwarded, that is the person you pulled from). > So I'm not entirely convinced yet. I don't *dislike* the concept, but > I could definitely do without it (or maybe have it in the commented > part of the commit message, so that you'd have to explicitly edit it > to show up). I am tempted to suggest removing the "via" part as a failed experiment for now. -- 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