Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 2 May 2005 20:29:16 -0700 | From | Matt Mackall <> | Subject | Re: Mercurial 0.4b vs git patchbomb benchmark |
| |
On Mon, May 02, 2005 at 07:48:29PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > On Mon, 2 May 2005, Matt Mackall wrote: > > > > Umm.. I am _not_ calculating the SHA of the delta itself. That'd be > > silly. > > It's not silly.
The delta is not the object I care about and its representation is arbitrary. In fact different branches will store different deltas depending on how their DAGs get topologically sorted. The object I care about is the original text, so that's the hash I store.
> In other words, you need to hash the metadata too. Otherwise how do you > consistency-check the _collection_ of files?
Well naturally, I hash the metadata too. For every change, there's a toplevel changeset hash that is the hash of the entire project state at that time. And it's all signable and so on. Just like git and just like Monotone.
-- Mathematics is the supreme nostalgia of our time. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |