Re: git merge vs git commit

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Junio C Hamano
Date: Tuesday, September 9, 2008 - 12:11 pm

Miklos Vajna <vmiklos@frugalware.org> writes:


That does not necessarily mean git-merge (or git-merge-octopus) uses that
C function when coming up with the set of commits to record as parents.

As to what the correct behaviour is, I personally do not have a strong
preference either way.

 - If you specify a fast-foward on the command line to merge into your
   HEAD, that is your choice and you may deserve the extra parent, even if
   it is redundant.  

 - On the other hand, if you try to merge a single fast-forward, we do not
   even create a merge commit, so in the same spirit it may be better if
   we dropped the original HEAD from the merged result (i.e. Russell's
   "cleanly merged" case).

I dunno.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
git merge vs git commit, Russell King, (Tue Sep 9, 9:52 am)
Re: git merge vs git commit, Junio C Hamano, (Tue Sep 9, 10:34 am)
Re: git merge vs git commit, Miklos Vajna, (Tue Sep 9, 11:54 am)
Re: git merge vs git commit, Junio C Hamano, (Tue Sep 9, 12:11 pm)
Re: git merge vs git commit, Matthieu Moy, (Tue Sep 9, 2:32 pm)