Re: Workflow to accumulate individual changes?

[Karl Fogel]

"Stephen J. Turnbull" <address@hidden> writes:
>Teemu Likonen writes:
> > No problem. I'll still repeat that it's indeed misinformation. Here's a
> > raw content of a certain commit object in Emacs Git repository (the
> > four-space indent is by me):
>
>cat'ing the object doesn't prove anything.  The header content is
>easily separable from the commit message, and in theory you could
>generate the SHA1 based on the header only.  (I can't imagine Linus
>doing such a thing, but it would immediately occur to most Emacs
>hackers.)

Heh.  I followed up in private mail to Teemu saying the same thing.

>Here's an experimental proof:
>
># Verify identity.
>$ git rev-parse HEAD
>f008c025d04f4bcec79f2bb463589461d95a3154
>$ git cat-file commit HEAD | git hash-object --stdin -t commit
>f008c025d04f4bcec79f2bb463589461d95a3154
>
># Verify difference -- I happen to know that the word "Update" occurs
># uniquely in the comment portion of this commit.
>$ git cat-file commit HEAD | sed -e s/Update/Rewrite/ \
>  | git hash-object --stdin -t commit
>ff2c9790c738d10205086a12ce394069ceccbb83

Now *that's* the proof we needed.  Thanks.

It would be very winning if some DVCS would

  a) Allow tweaking commit messages
  b) Version those tweaks
  c) Propagate those tweaks to other branches whenever the other branch
     receives data from the tweaked branch
  d) Have a conflict resolution mechanism for when different tweaks collide

This is a tall order, however.  I'm not surprised no DVCS (AFAIK) does it.

-K