From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.0 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id CEA261F87F for ; Mon, 19 Nov 2018 03:49:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727686AbeKSOIP (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Nov 2018 09:08:15 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp20.pobox.com ([173.228.157.52]:64047 "EHLO pb-smtp20.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726903AbeKSOIO (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Nov 2018 09:08:14 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp20.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 36F362DFAC; Sun, 18 Nov 2018 22:45:59 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=7zS6ea4xFYwrdRWx5zuCPb3gN6I=; b=if80FX zpjIK0PKAKCsv9FxgTOL5gQi7rOXaN5fLlzruAemsH+MOqf6BIGptsicyp8dN8oc YpnLcrmQKpbNQrRAqwvxjWgl+Baf3Aob1G5LkWj+IrO7AuRQkkvZ2mesZkq/msVz WEzbmQJ6FQl8NnrAqPHCu4NXneznWaa3m48gM= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=FyKyVfZgu6dM4xx/Z5POmeCVsrZHNO6K ZrmYoF7coSw1OG/rrc5BCTtc9OVwFUM8McAGB11OOH17NSiG+sP3zvEvvxgeIqUB S0hzNRBSQOMaO+VIldLCKqkfIS/oHbQOVPXaOksC9i1ACZC+NAhnFFO9TX7SXx+w m5GpZZgL6us= Received: from pb-smtp20.sea.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3115C2DFAB; Sun, 18 Nov 2018 22:45:59 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [104.155.68.112]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3CD832DFAA; Sun, 18 Nov 2018 22:45:56 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Stefan Xenos Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Stefan Beller , Jonathan Nieder , Junio C Hamano , Jonathan Tan , Derrick Stolee , Carl Baldwin , Dave Borowitz Subject: Re: [PATCH] technical doc: add a design doc for the evolve command References: <20181115005546.212538-1-sxenos@google.com> Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2018 12:45:53 +0900 In-Reply-To: (Stefan Xenos's message of "Sun, 18 Nov 2018 19:33:33 -0800") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 9EE7E77C-EBAD-11E8-84A5-F5C31241B9FE-77302942!pb-smtp20.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Stefan Xenos writes: >> I meant the project's history, not the meta-graph thing. > > In that case, we agree. The proposal suggests that "origin" should be > reachable from the meta-graph for the cherry-picked commit, NOT the > cherry-picked commit itself. Does that resolve our disagreement, or is > reachability from the meta-graph also undesirable for you? Sorry, I confused myself. Yes, I do mind that the "origin" thing in the meta history to pin the old commit whose contents were cherry picked to create a new commit, which is separate from the old commit that was rewritten to create a new commit. The latter (i.e. the old one) I do not mind to get retrieved when such a meta commit is fetched, and all of us of course would want the new one, too (which is the whole point of adding the meta commit to help other commits built on the old one migrate to the new one). But I simply do not see the point of having to drag the history leading to "origin", and that is why I am moderately against recording "the change in this came from that commit via cherry-pick" in a meta commit.