[plt-dev] One e-mail per commit?

Eli Barzilay <eli at barzilay.org> writes:

> On May 17, Michael Sperber wrote:
>> Eli Barzilay <eli at barzilay.org> writes:
>> 
>> > On May 17, Michael Sperber wrote:
>> >> Eli Barzilay <eli at barzilay.org> writes:
>> >> 
>> >> > You mean that Sam will have his own repository with a different
>> >> > history where my five commits are squashed into one, and his
>> >> > own commits are present in more detail (which involve him doing
>> >> > the 86 commits as usual, then writing a new total commit log
>> >> > message that would be present in the public repository but not
>> >> > in his oen)?
>> >> 
>> >> Essentially: However, it won't be different in git's identity
>> >> sense of the word - it will have additional stuff in it, namely
>> >> the 86 individual commits that the rest of us shouldn't be
>> >> looking it.  And that new total commit message would actually
>> >> worthwhile, because we'd see the big picture instead of the
>> >> itty-bitty details that matter only to Sam.
>> >> 
>> >> > If so, then I think that you have some misunderstanding of how
>> >> > git works.
>> >> 
>> >> This is not a question of how git works, it's a question of
>> >> organizing your workflow.  git is perfectly able to handle this
>> >> workflow.
>> >
>> > I have no idea what you're talking about here.  For the history to
>> > be the same in git's identity's sense, it must be exactly the same
>> > history on both repositories -- either all of them present in
>> > both, or the overall single one in both.
>> 
>> Let me re-phrase: The revision graph in the central repository will
>> be a subgraph of the revision graph in Sam's repository.  All the
>> patches of the central repository will be in Sam's repository, and
>> they will have the identity (i.e. same hash) there.
>
> Git doesn't keep a history of sha1-ed patches -- it's a history of
> commits, each pointing to a tree and a parent commit(s).  If we both
> have the same <sha1>, then `git log <sha1>' in both of our repository
> is guaranteed to be exactly the same graph, same author, dates, and
> log messages -- they're all part of the resulting hash.

Right.  So?  Sam's repository has more <sha1>s than the central
repository.  This situation comes up not only in the workflow I
described, but every time Sam pulls from the central repository when he
still has unpushed changes in his own repository.  (Sorry, Sam, to be on
your case all the time ...)

-- 
Cheers =8-} Mike
Friede, Völkerverständigung und überhaupt blabla