From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
To: "Shawn O. Pearce" <spearce@spearce.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>, git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: History over-simplification
Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2007 15:42:54 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <7v4phi4b9t.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20070923044628.GA3099@spearce.org> (Shawn O. Pearce's message of "Sun, 23 Sep 2007 00:46:28 -0400")
"Shawn O. Pearce" <spearce@spearce.org> writes:
> I don't really like the patch to revision.c because it winds up
> showing trivial merges too. What I really want is to have the
> "--full-history" option include a merge if either of the following
> is true:
>
> a) The resulting path does not match _any_ of the parents. We
> already handle this case correctly in revision.c and correctly
> show the "evil" merge.
>
> b) The resulting path matches one of the parents but not one of
> the others. In such a case the merge should still be output if
> a 3-way read-tree would not have chosen this result by default.
I am not sure (b) is useful in general. Merging two branches
that fix the same issue but in different ways (think: 'maint'
and 'master' have different infrastructure and a fix initially
made on 'master' was backported to 'maint', and then later
'maint' needed to be merged to 'master' to carry forward other
fixes) is a norm, and in such cases taking the version from the
merged-to branch is almost always what happens.
Also it sounds to me by "if read-tree would not have chosen this
result by default" you mean this feature would not just need to
run merge-base but also recursive merge-base synthesis, and also
recreate the structural merge (aka "rename detection") there as
well. Even if (b) is useful, it sounds like a very expensive
option, and the current merge-recursive code is structured in
such a way to be easily reused for this purpose.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-09-25 22:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-09-23 4:46 History over-simplification Shawn O. Pearce
2007-09-25 22:42 ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
2007-09-26 15:55 ` Shawn O. Pearce
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2007-09-27 4:56 linux
2007-09-27 5:34 ` Junio C Hamano
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=7v4phi4b9t.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org \
--to=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=spearce@spearce.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://80x24.org/mirrors/git.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).