Re: [ANNOUNCE] pg - A patch porcelain for GIT

[Shawn Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>]

Sam Vilain <sam@vilain.net> wrote:
> Petr Baudis wrote:
> >>my impression of git is that you don't change stuff that's already 
> >>committed.  you revert changes by applying a new commit that backs out 
> >>the original changes.  i'm speculating, but i suspect that's why there's 
> >>a "stg pick --reverse" and not a "stg uncommit."
> >It is ok as long as you know what are you doing - if you don't push out
> >the commits you've just "undid" (or work on a public accessible
> >repository in the first place, but I think that's kind of rare these
> >days; quick survey - does anyone reading these lines do that?), there's
> >nothing wrong on it, and it gives you nice flexibility.
> 
> Yes, and this is one problem I envision with publishing a git repository
> with an stgit stack applied - somebody later doing a pull of it will not
> find the head revision they had.  I'm not sure what the net effect of
> this will be, though.

It would cause some pain for anyone pulling from it with git-pull, as
git-pull won't happily go backwards from what I've seen. But I think
you can force it to do so even if it won't make sense during the
resulting merge, which then leaves the user in an interesting state.

This is actually why pg-rebase doesn't care what you move to
when you grab the remote's commit; it just jumps to that commit
and pushes your patch stack back down onto it.  So if the remote
rebuilds itself through a new commit lineage which you have never
seen before the next pg-rebase will still update to it.  But on
the other hand if you have a commit that isn't in your local patch
stack its gone into the bit bucket.

Publishing a repository with a stg (or pg) patch series isn't
a problem; the problem is that no clients currently know how to
follow along with the remote repository's patch series.  And I can't
think of a sensible behavior for doing so that isn't what git-core is
already doing today for non patch series type clients (as in don't go
backwards by popping but instead by pushing a negative delta).  :-)

-- 
Shawn.