4 ms·

I want to be able to preserve two parallel commit histories: one where the the commits are ordered by time, and another where the commits are ordered by 'story'

I want to be able to preserve two parallel commit histories: one where the the commits are ordered by time, and another where the commits are ordered by 'story'. Git could cryptographically verify that the end-states of the two histories are identical, and allow me to alter the storied history at will (shifting hunks between commits, splitting/combining commits, reordering commits etc), where during merge both histories are preserved. I don't really follow your naming critique though. "commit groups" seems like a fine name, they are groups of commits. What you describe I would call "committer groups".

dllthomas 5y ago
Something like --date-order to view commits chronologically vs --topo-order to view them topologically sorted?
nine_k 5y ago
What is your use case? How do you develop so that your story does not belong to one (or more) feature branches where it can be held, unmixed with other stories? Can your story continue through multiple merges to the main / release / whatever branch(es)? I'm asking totally unironically; every company's flow may be different, and for good reasons which I'm oblivious about. So I'd gladly read if you had time to explain.