From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: Couple of read-tree questions Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2005 23:32:36 -0700 Message-ID: <7vvf1l1env.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> References: <7vll2h4bc8.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Sep 01 08:34:06 2005 Return-path: Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EAicr-0005GE-MT for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Thu, 01 Sep 2005 08:32:42 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965058AbVIAGci (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Sep 2005 02:32:38 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S965059AbVIAGci (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Sep 2005 02:32:38 -0400 Received: from fed1rmmtao10.cox.net ([68.230.241.29]:22185 "EHLO fed1rmmtao10.cox.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965058AbVIAGci (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Sep 2005 02:32:38 -0400 Received: from assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net ([68.4.9.127]) by fed1rmmtao10.cox.net (InterMail vM.6.01.05.02 201-2131-123-102-20050715) with ESMTP id <20050901063236.HPQX3414.fed1rmmtao10.cox.net@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>; Thu, 1 Sep 2005 02:32:36 -0400 To: Daniel Barkalow In-Reply-To: (Daniel Barkalow's message of "Thu, 1 Sep 2005 02:16:17 -0400 (EDT)") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110004 (No Gnus v0.4) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Daniel Barkalow writes: > (The thread you mention seems to say that we accept entries being missing > from the index as if they were unchanged, but I don't see a good reason > for this; you'd be dealing with the full set in the index for the merge, > even if you don't have a populated working tree) You are correct. I was wondering myself why *both* of us thought (or Linus *seemed* to be agreeing, at least to me) what I was referring to as I+H made any sense while re-reaing the thread. > I should have asked sooner, then. :) There's a bunch of clutter to get it > to work that I can remove if it's not actually necessary. Yeah, removal of dead code! Go wild, please.