From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Miklos Vajna Subject: Re: Octopus merge: unique (?) to git, but is it useful? Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2008 01:11:51 +0200 Message-ID: <20080603231151.GR29404@genesis.frugalware.org> References: <200806030314.03252.jnareb@gmail.com> <7v3anv5fy3.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="c6397Mob2532IpCX" Cc: Junio C Hamano , git@vger.kernel.org To: Linus Torvalds X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Jun 04 01:12:52 2008 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 1K3fgM-0004H5-Uj for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Wed, 04 Jun 2008 01:12:47 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753845AbYFCXLy (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Jun 2008 19:11:54 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753970AbYFCXLy (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Jun 2008 19:11:54 -0400 Received: from virgo.iok.hu ([193.202.89.103]:54476 "EHLO virgo.iok.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753749AbYFCXLy (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Jun 2008 19:11:54 -0400 Received: from kag.elte.hu (kag.elte.hu [157.181.177.1]) by virgo.iok.hu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 551181B255D; Wed, 4 Jun 2008 01:11:52 +0200 (CEST) Received: from genesis.frugalware.org (frugalware.elte.hu [157.181.177.34]) by kag.elte.hu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9507F4469E; Wed, 4 Jun 2008 00:54:33 +0200 (CEST) Received: by genesis.frugalware.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id BD4D51190ACA; Wed, 4 Jun 2008 01:11:51 +0200 (CEST) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: --c6397Mob2532IpCX Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Jun 03, 2008 at 07:40:21AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > Right. But git shouldn't do duplicate parents. I agree it's a mis-use of= =20 > git merge, but either we should have errored out or we should have pruned= =20 > the parents. >=20 > Yes, the end result is "tecnically correct", but it's not optimal. I think the current git-merge.sh already handles this: 6ea23343 introduced the usage of git-show-branch --independent to filter out duplicated parents. --c6397Mob2532IpCX Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) iEUEARECAAYFAkhFz7cACgkQe81tAgORUJYskwCfeFhAoUbR7wixiNiROmq9G61T kIAAmK5Lws8z2nOjJJh22ewYF//1gdo= =FmLp -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --c6397Mob2532IpCX--