patches-applied historical imports (usd import)

[Ian Jackson]

Robie Basak writes ("Re: patches-applied historical imports (usd import)"):
> Right now, we're accepting rich history only for Ubuntu-specific
> commits. I don't think we have really considered yet what would be best
> for Debian. But in the future, if Debian is interested in the same
> mechanism, then the same would apply to Debian's ancestory trees. I
> don't see any reason why it wouldn't make sense for Debian to do the
> same thing here.

When Debian has its own complete and ongoing git history, with a
mixture of rich and imported histories, you will obviously want to
fold that into your ongoing Ubuntu history.  How do you plan to do
that ?

> The applied branches (created on your request) has the unapplied branch
> as a parent (sort of like git-dpm does), so the same
> non-reproducible-ness filters through.

Right.

> I believe it does currently, unless Nish steps in to correct me. So this
> part could indeed be the same. However, I think the same rich history
> case above applies here too. We're not doing it right now, but if a
> maintainer wants to supply rich upstream commits (for example by
> connecting upstream's VCS to the commit graph), then I think this is
> something the importer could support. And in this case, the commit
> hashes would start to mismatch.

Indeed.  I don't think this can be made perfect but the more we make
it similar the better.

dgit's imports of tarball are always origin commits, with a separate
commit to stitch them into history.  That allows for a different
import of the same tarball to have different parents, but still share
the same tarball origin commit.

Thanks,
Ian.

-- 
Ian Jackson <ijackson at chiark.greenend.org.uk>   These opinions are my own.

If I emailed you from an address @fyvzl.net or @evade.org.uk, that is
a private address which bypasses my fierce spamfilter.