On Sun, 17 Apr 2005, Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Sun, 17 Apr 2005, Daniel Barkalow wrote:
--- 45f926575d2c44072bfcf2317dbf3f0fbb513a4e/revision.h (mode:100644
sha1:28d0de3261a61f68e4e0948a25a416a515cd2e83)
+++ 37a0b01b85c2999243674d48bfc71cdba0e5518e/revision.h (mode:100644
sha1:523bde6e14e18bb0ecbded8f83ad4df93fc467ab)
@@ -24,6 +24,7 @@
unsigned int flags;
unsigned char sha1[20];
unsigned long date;
+ unsigned char tree[20];
struct parent *parent;
};
I think this is really wrong.
The whole point of revision.h is that it's a generic framework for
keeping track of relationships between different objects. And those
objects are in no way just commit objects.
For example, fsck uses this struct revision to create a full free of
_all_ the object dependencies, which means that a struct revision can be
any object at all - it's not in any way limited to commit objects, and
there is no tree object that is associated with these things at all.
I entirely missed this. No wonder my fsck-cache conversion wasn't going
so well...
Besides, why do you want the tree? There's really nothing you can do with
the tree to a first approximation - you need to _first_ do the
reachability analysis entirely on the commit dependencies, and then when
you've selected a set of commits, you can just output those.
I actually want the tree for http-pull, not merging stuff. I was trying to
get a commit parser, not reachability at that point.
I think the right thing is to make a separate struct commit that has the
stuff I want in it, and probably do a struct tree at the same time.
-Daniel
*This .sig left intentionally blank*
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe git in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
