Re: [PATCH 3/3] name-rev: --weight option (WIP)

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

 



On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 08:53:49PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:

> Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes:
> 
> > I wonder if you can
> > define the weight as a recursive function of the parents.
> 
> I do not think we can.  A merge Z between X (that has N commits
> behind it) and Y (that has M commits behind it) has at most N+M+1
> commits behind it (counting itself), but we cannot tell how many
> among these N and M are shared.
> 
> > That would double-count "A" and "B" in this example. But maybe there is
> > a clever way to define it that avoids that.
> 
> We've dealt with this issue long time ago when we optimized the
> bisection count, which involves exactly the same issue.

OK. I didn't think too hard about it, so I'll trust you that it is not
easy. I wonder if using the generation number would be another way of
defining "oldest" that would be easier to calculate.

-Peff
--
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]