From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: git-fetch will leave a ref pointing to a tag Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2007 09:59:18 -0400 Message-ID: <20070703135918.GA18597@coredump.intra.peff.net> References: <20070703032315.7279.qmail@science.horizon.com> <20070703041859.GB4007@coredump.intra.peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: linux@horizon.com, git@vger.kernel.org To: Johannes Schindelin X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Jul 03 15:59:25 2007 connect(): Connection refused Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1I5iua-0007TK-JX for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Tue, 03 Jul 2007 15:59:24 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754200AbXGCN7W (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Jul 2007 09:59:22 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754146AbXGCN7W (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Jul 2007 09:59:22 -0400 Received: from 66-23-211-5.clients.speedfactory.net ([66.23.211.5]:1936 "EHLO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753922AbXGCN7V (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Jul 2007 09:59:21 -0400 Received: (qmail 18455 invoked from network); 3 Jul 2007 13:59:41 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO coredump.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.2) by peff.net with (DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA encrypted) SMTP; 3 Jul 2007 13:59:41 -0000 Received: by coredump.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Tue, 03 Jul 2007 09:59:18 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Tue, Jul 03, 2007 at 01:01:49PM +0100, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > If it is only the test, you can do that by > > test $(git merge-base foo bar) = $(git rev-parse foo) I had thought that calculating the merge base was actually slightly less efficient in this case, since it will actually find all of the merge bases (but I could very well be wrong). But really, either should produce the result effectively instantaneously. > (which tests if foo is a stricth ancestor of bar). Although in your > (linux@horizon.com's) place I would really look at "git log foo.." myself, > as peff almost suggested. Yes. In fact, I find an even more useful operation in that case to be "gitk foo..." to see "where I'm at" with respect to my changes and upstream changes. -Peff