Re: Workflow to accumulate individual changes?

[Stephen J. Turnbull]

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.)

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