[Nix-dev] Re: new possible movement to git (?)

[Peter Simons]

Hi,

 >> Given that branches are mere pointers, I don't see how to find out
 >> what was stdenv-updates before after it has been merged into trunk
 >> and re-created
 >
 > Yeah, it would be nice if git had information in commits about which
 > branch the commit was initially performed on. This seems like a
 > really simple feature, not sure why it doesn't exist.

personally, I don't see why that information is relevant. Branch names
are a local affair in Git. It's quite possible for two repositories to
track the same content using completely different branch names. So why
bother recording the name if it doesn't have any significance outside of
the repository? Other DVCS make a lot of fuss about branch names, like
monotone, but I don't see any gain in a distributed project. 

The whole notion of having a "stdenv-updates" branch in the first place
is obsolete in Git. Instead, we would have many small topic branches for
specific features.

Also, I'm not quite sure why there should be an extra "stable" branch.
As far as I am concerned, "master" ought to be stable.

Take care,
Peter