From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: [PATCH] merge: indicate remote tracking branches in merge message Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2009 06:00:45 -0400 Message-ID: <20090809100045.GA25197@coredump.intra.peff.net> References: <20090809065936.GA24112@coredump.intra.peff.net> <7vab29a1fr.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> <20090809074035.GA4778@coredump.intra.peff.net> <20090809091443.GA676@coredump.intra.peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: git@vger.kernel.org To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sun Aug 09 12:00:57 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1Ma5Cx-0004Fc-Sx for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Sun, 09 Aug 2009 12:00:56 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753743AbZHIKAr (ORCPT ); Sun, 9 Aug 2009 06:00:47 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753738AbZHIKAr (ORCPT ); Sun, 9 Aug 2009 06:00:47 -0400 Received: from peff.net ([208.65.91.99]:52366 "EHLO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753683AbZHIKAq (ORCPT ); Sun, 9 Aug 2009 06:00:46 -0400 Received: (qmail 3076 invoked by uid 107); 9 Aug 2009 10:03:00 -0000 Received: from coredump.intra.peff.net (HELO coredump.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.2) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.40) with (AES128-SHA encrypted) SMTP; Sun, 09 Aug 2009 06:03:00 -0400 Received: by coredump.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Sun, 09 Aug 2009 06:00:45 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090809091443.GA676@coredump.intra.peff.net> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Sun, Aug 09, 2009 at 05:14:43AM -0400, Jeff King wrote: > In t4202, we have a branch name and a tag name that are the same > (octopus-a), and we "git merge octopus-a". This actually merges the tag, > but because the branch name existed, we write "Merge branch 'octopus-a'" > in the log, which is not true. With your patch, it does the right thing > and says "Merge commit 'octopus-a'". > > The simple thing is to just update the "expect" text. Though the current > behavior does show off the ability to collape the two branches and say > > Merge branches 'octopus-a' and 'octopus-b' > > instead of > > Merge commit 'octopus-a'; commit 'octopus-b' Thinking about it for a few seconds, it's silly to try to test something that happens to occur in a totally unrelated test. The right thing to do is to write actual tests for this area, fix the bug, and then add the new feature. So how about this series: [1/3] add tests for merge message headings [2/3] merge: fix incorrect merge message for ambiguous tag/branch [3/3] merge: indicate remote tracking branches in merge message -Peff