[RFC] [PATCH] (was: speeding up commits)

[duchier at ps.uni-sb.de]

Martin Pool <mbp at sourcefrog.net> writes:

> This increases the number of ways in which the working inventory behaves
> differently from a recorded inventory.  That's fine, but makes me wonder
> if we shouldn't have two classes (or groups of classes), rather than one
> which sometimes behaves one way, sometimes another.

I am a little to new to this neighbourhood to voice an informed
opinion yet, but I certainly found the schizophrenic inventories to be
a tad confusing ;-)

> I would like to have some new tests for this functionality.  For example
> after a commit check that the working inventory shows the right
> predecessors, and also after a merge.

yes.  I need to become a bit more familiar with the testing
infrastructure though.

> This tends to speak of 'heads', which is the git term and not a bad word
> for it, but a new use here.  It might fit better to say 'new parents' or
> 'pending parents'. 

the name "previous_heads" is not my doing, I just kept it as it was.
I am also not satisfied with it, but it's not my place to change it.
I don't think "parents" would be a good choice because we are already
using that notion to express the inventory hierarchy ("parent_id").

Cheers,

--Denys