Re: [TOPIC 9/17] Obsolescence markers and evolve

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

 



On Sun, May 10, 2020 at 12:31:37AM +0300, Noam Soloveichik wrote:

> On 12/03/2020 6:04, James Ramsay wrote:
> > 1. Brandon: I thought it would be interesting to have a similar feature
> > as Mercurial has. Mercurial evolve will help you do a big rebase
> > commit by commit. Giving you more insights how commits change over time.
> >
> > 2. Peff: This has been discussed a lot of time on the list already.
> Since I'm very interested in this topic, can you link me to some key
> discussions you remember? Most of what I've found is Stefan Xenos having
> a take on implementing it.

Sorry, I don't much to offer. The discussion from Stefan is the only one
I remember talking about evolve itself.

I think my comment may have been specifically about the extra graph
pointers that would be needed to represent rebases, etc. The general
concept of a parent pointer that doesn't imply reachability has come up
over the years. I don't have any links handy, though, and searching for
"parent" in the list archive is not likely to be all that helpful.

Hmm, searching for "parent" and "reachable" also turns up a lot, but
this one is probably relevant:

  https://lore.kernel.org/git/20060425035421.18382.51677.stgit@localhost.localdomain/

Something that old is as likely to hurt as help, though. ;)

-Peff



[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]

  Powered by Linux