[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: request for comments on partial commits
From: |
Lionel Elie Mamane |
Subject: |
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: request for comments on partial commits |
Date: |
Tue, 11 Apr 2006 04:53:57 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.11+cvs20060126 |
On Thu, Feb 23, 2006 at 11:20:08AM -0500, Stefan Monnier wrote:
>>> Hi, for the partial commit problem I am thinking of a simple method:
>>> the user will have to commit the whole tree after a file renaming
>>> or file deletion operation, which means the change to the
>>> directory content. Are there any objection to this approach as a
>>> short-term measure?
>> Short term, it is OK, but long term you want:
>> - For every smallest set S of file names such that S is stable by the
>> operation "f got moved to f'", the user has to commit either all
>> files whose old or new name is in S.
> Yes.
>> Implementing the graph walking algorithms to find the partition of
>> files in S's in C is left as an exercise to the reader.
> I don't see any graph-walking here: check the status of the selected files.
> - if a file was only modified it's OK.
> - if a file was moved within the set, it's OK.
> - if a file was added/removed from the set, then do a full-tree traversal
> to determine whether it was moved to/from the selected set (in which case
> we have an error) or whether it was really added/removed to/from the whole
> tree, in which case it's also OK.
Ah, yes! You make me realise that a file is only moved ... once! I was
thinking of multiple move operations: A -> B -> C -> D, but really, if
the user does these moves consecutively, it is seen as exactly A -> D.
--
Lionel
[Prev in Thread] |
Current Thread |
[Next in Thread] |
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: request for comments on partial commits,
Lionel Elie Mamane <=