On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 6:46 PM, Jonathan Nieder <jrnie...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Nico Williams wrote:
>
>> - one could see the history of branches, including
>
> Interesting. 'git log -g' is good for getting that information
> locally, but the protocol doesn't have a way to get it from a remote
> server so you have to ssh in. Ronnie (cc-ed) and I were talking
> recently about whether it would make sense to update git protocol to
> have a way to get at the remote reflogs more easily --- would that be
> useful to you?
Yes and no. I've thought about that some concept, but:
a) reflogs include information about what's done to the workspace
(checkout...) that's not relevant to any branch,
b) reflogs aren't objects, which ISTM has caused transactional issued
(even if they are fixed or soon to be),
c) the fewer kinds of things, the more elegant the design, so maybe
reflogs ought to be objects themselves, which is one thought that led
me to "branches should be objects".
Another thought that led me there is that I often do:
$ git checkout -b ${branch}-rebase1
$ git rebase -i master
...
$ git checkout -b ${branch}-rebase2
$ git rebase -i master
...
I iterate through this until a set of commits is the way the upstream wants it.
No one really needs that history, except me: possibly to show my
boss/customer, possibly to put together a list of changes I've done to
show the upstream maintainer, ... Yes, this is in the reflog, but...
it's mixed up with unrelated stuff.
Also, I'd like to be able to git diff
<branch-version>..<same-branch-diff-branch-version>. Again, for my
own purposes in collating changes I've done to previously submitted
PRs.
Now, I can do that as I always have, but it litters my branch namespace.
Lastly, there are people who just don't get rebasing. They think it's
horrible because it changes the truth. You've met them, I'm certain.
Branches as objects might help mollify them.
>> - how commits were grouped when pushed/pulled (push 5 commits, and
>> the branch object will record that its head moved by those five
>> commits at once)
>
> The reflog on the server (if enabled) records this.
Yeah, though as you point out I can't see it.
>> - rebase history (git log <branch-object> -> better than git reflog!)
>
> The local reflog ('git log -g <branch>') records this.
See above.
>> - object transactional APIs would be used to update branches
>
> Ronnie's recent ref-transaction code does this.
Speaking of which: are there any power failure corruption cases left
in git? How is this tested?
Nico
--
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
