Re: [PATCH 0/4] Re: cherry-pick and 'log --no-walk' and ordering

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

 



Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> writes:

> Would anything break if we take your patch, but without two
> possibilities to revs->no_walk option (i.e. we never sort under
> no_walk)?

By the way, by "would anything break", I do not just mean if our
existing tests trigger failures from "test_expect_success"; I
suspect some do assume the sorting behaviour.  I am wondering if the
sorting makes sense in the real users; in other words, if the
failing tests, if any, are expecting sensible and useful behaviour.

After all, the sorting by the commit timestamp is made solely to
optimize the limit_list() which wants to traverse commits ancestry
near the tip of the history, and sorting by the commit timestamp is
done because it is usually a good and quick approximation for
topological sorting.
--
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]