From 4f7bb78204b902d6a4bfd4bb3cc1a409b7ad9255 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Joey Hess Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2016 13:04:02 -0400 Subject: updates --- doc/design/adjusted_branches.mdwn | 160 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------ 1 file changed, 110 insertions(+), 50 deletions(-) (limited to 'doc/design') diff --git a/doc/design/adjusted_branches.mdwn b/doc/design/adjusted_branches.mdwn index 6cb282f1b..7d89a93c0 100644 --- a/doc/design/adjusted_branches.mdwn +++ b/doc/design/adjusted_branches.mdwn @@ -20,30 +20,129 @@ play out.] [[!toc]] -## merge +## filtering + + master adjusted/master + A + |--------------->A' + | | + +When generating commit A', reuse the date and author and committer of A. +This means that two users with the adjusted branch checked out and using +the same filters will get identical shas for A', and so can collaborate on +them. + +## commit + +When committing changes, a commit is made as usual to the adjusted branch. +So, the user can `git commit`. This does not touch the original branch yet. + +Then we need to get from that commit to one with the filters reversed, +which should be the same as if the adjusted branch had not been used. +This commit gets added onto the original branch. + +So, the branches would look like this: + + master adjusted/master + A + |--------------->A' + | | + | |C (new commit) + B - - - - - - - - + | + |--------------->B' + | | + +Note particularly that B does not have A' or C in its history; +the adjusted branch is not evident from outside. -When merging changes from a remote, apply the filter to the head of the -remote branch, resulting in a commit with its changes. Merge in that -commit. Note that it's possible to control the metadata of the commit such -that 2 users who have the same adjusted branch checked out, both generate -the same commit sha. +Also note that B gets filtered and the adjusted branch is rebased on top of +it, so C does not remain in the adjusted branch history either. This will +make other checkouts that are in the same adjusted branch end up with the +same B' commit when they pull B. + +It might be useful to have a post-commit hook that generates B and B' +and updates the branches. And/or `git-annex sync` could do it. + +[WORKTREE: A pre-commit hook would be needed to update the staged changes, +reversing the filter before the commit is made. All the other complications +above are avoided.] + +## merge This would be done by `git annex merge` and `git annex sync`. +Note that the adjusted files db needs to be updated to reflect the changes +that are merged in, for object add/remove to work as described below. + +When merging, there should never be any commits present on the +adjusted/master branch that have not yet been filtered over to the master +branch. There may be staged changes, or changes in the work tree. + +First filter the new commit: + + master adjusted/master + A + |--------------->A' + | | + | | + B + | + |---------->B' + +Then, merge that into adjusted/master: + + master adjusted/master + A + |--------------->A' + | | + | | + B | + | | + |----------->B'->B'' + +That will take care of updating the work tree. (If there's a merge +conflict it will happen here.) + +Now one extra step is needed; reset adjusted/master to use B' +(here it's important that B'' and B' have the same tree). + + master adjusted/master + A + |--------------->A' + | | + | | + B + | + |--------------->B' + | | + +Notice how similar this is to the commit graph above. So, merging +the same B commit from master will lead to an identical sha for B' +as the committer got. + +(What if there is a merge conflict? Then B'' won't be created yet +and the conflict is between A' and B'. User can resolve that conflict as +usual, which may lead to a commit (or perhaps they resolve the conflict +in the work tree without a commit. The conficted merge +commit is handled like any other commit to the adjusted/master branch; +it gets reverse filtered back to master and bounces back to +adjusted/master.) + Since the adjusted/master branch is not present on the remote, if the user does a `git pull`, it won't merge in changes from origin/master. Which is good because the filter needs to be applied first. -[WORKTREE: `git pull` would update the work tree, and may lead to conflicts -between the adjusted work tree and pulled changes. A post-merge hook would -be needed to re-adjust the work tree, and there would be a window where eg, -not present files would appear in the work tree.] - However, if the user does `git merge origin/master`, they'll get into a state where the filter has not been applied. The post-merge hook could be used to clean up after that. Or, let the user foot-shoot this way; they can always reset back once they notice the mistake. +[WORKTREE: `git pull` would update the work tree, and may lead to conflicts +between the adjusted work tree and pulled changes. A post-merge hook would +be needed to re-adjust the work tree, and there would be a window where eg, +not present files would appear in the work tree.] + ## annex object add/remove When objects are added/removed from the annex, the associated file has to @@ -57,45 +156,6 @@ These changes would need to be committed to the adjusted branch, otherwise [WORKTREE: Simply adjust the work tree (and index) per the filter.] -## commit - -When committing changes, a commit is made as usual to the adjusted branch. -So, the user can `git commit` (or `git annex sync`). This does not touch -the original branch yet. - -Then we need to get from that commit to one with the filters reversed, -which should be the same as if the adjusted branch had not been used. -This commit gets added onto the original branch. - -So, the branches would look like this: - - master adjusted/master - A ---filter----> A - | | - | A' - | | - | B' - B <--rev filter- | - | B - | ---filter----> | - | B'' - -Note particularly that B does not have A' in its history; the adjusted -branch is not evident from outside. So, we need a way to detect commits -like A'. - -Also note that B gets merged back to the adjusted branch, re-applying the -filter. This will make other checkouts that are in the same adjusted branch -end up with the same B'' commit when they pull B. - -It might be useful to have a post-commit hook that generates the -reverse-filtered commit and updates the original branch. And/or -`git-annex sync` could do it. - -[WORKTREE: A pre-commit hook would be needed to update the staged changes, -reversing the filter before the commit is made. All the other complications -above are avoided.] - ## reverse filtering Reversing filter #1 would mean only converting pointer files to -- cgit v1.2.3