From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sat, 15 Mar 2003 15:43:22 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sat, 15 Mar 2003 15:43:22 -0500 Received: from franka.aracnet.com ([216.99.193.44]:21720 "EHLO franka.aracnet.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sat, 15 Mar 2003 15:43:21 -0500 Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2003 12:53:55 -0800 From: "Martin J. Bligh" To: Pavel Machek , Daniel Phillips cc: Zack Brown , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: BitBucket: GPL-ed KitBeeper clone Message-ID: <36800000.1047761634@[10.10.2.4]> In-Reply-To: <20030314122903.GC8057@zaurus.ucw.cz> References: <200303020011.QAA13450@adam.yggdrasil.com> <20030311184043.GA24925@renegade> <22230000.1047408397@flay> <20030311192639.E72163C5BE@mx01.nexgo.de> <20030314122903.GC8057@zaurus.ucw.cz> X-Mailer: Mulberry/2.2.1 (Linux/x86) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > Yes. > > Some kind of better-patch is badly needed. > > What kind of data would have to be in soft-changeset? > * unique id of changeset > * unique id of previous changeset > (two previous if it is merge) > ? or would it be better to have here > whole path to first change? > * commit comment > * for each file: > ** diff -u of change > ** file's unique id > ** in case of rename: new name (delete is rename to special dir) > ** in case of chmod/chown: new permissions > ** per-file comment > > ? How to handle directory moves? > > Does it seem sane? Any comments? Looks good to me. If people keep changesets sanely, then there should be no need for per-file comments IMHO, but I'm sure that's a matter of debate. M.