Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Avoiding ancestor scan during get with revision library

[Miles Bader]

On Thu, May 06, 2004 at 06:10:11PM -0400, Stefan Monnier wrote:
> > Something that would be quite valuable in this would be non-volatile
> > ancestry data in the tree.  Patchlogs are almost right (and I've got
> > tools that use 'em), but since patchlogs can be removed (e.g. by replay
> > --reverse, or by your good self), we can't rely on them in every case.
> 
> Huh?  That's what patch-logs are for, isn't it?
> If the user dicks around with it, it's his problem.

Yeah, and let's add the compress-patch-log stuff to remove some the
temptation to delete them...

-Miles
-- 
My spirit felt washed.  With blood.  [Eli Shin, on "The Passion of the Christ"]