Jakub Narebski wrote: > On Tue, 9 Sep 2008, Jeff King wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 09, 2008 at 01:42:52PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > Now, that being said: > > > > > After reading the discussion so far, I am still not convinced if this is a > > > good idea, nor this time around it is that much different from what the > > > previous "prior" link discussion tried to do. > > > > For the record, I am not convinced it is a good idea either; I was > > hoping to steer it in a direction where somebody could say "and now this > > is the useful thing we can do now that we could not do before." If the > > ultimate goal is to put links to other commits into history viewers, > > then the commit message is a reasonable place to do so. The only thing I > > see improving with a header is that it makes more sense for pruning and > > object transfer. > > I'm also not all convinced that 'cousin'/'origin'/'changeset'/'cset' > header is a good idea. I only tried to steer discussion in good > direction if it is somewhat a good idea. By the way, beside graphical history viewers it would also help rebase (and git-cherry) notice when patch was already applied better. -- Jakub Narebski Poland -- 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
