From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Francis Moreau Subject: Re: question about a merge result Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2009 17:05:19 +0200 Message-ID: <38b2ab8a0904300805j5ce19617mdda3254c37d06d38@mail.gmail.com> References: <38b2ab8a0904300521m9e31867j7848135acfae0faa@mail.gmail.com> <49F99AE3.5090406@gmx.net> <20090430142635.GB23550@coredump.intra.peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Michael Gaber , git@vger.kernel.org To: Jeff King X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Apr 30 17:06:18 2009 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 1LzXq5-0001Zv-Gx for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Thu, 30 Apr 2009 17:06:18 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1762996AbZD3PFY (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Apr 2009 11:05:24 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1763930AbZD3PFW (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Apr 2009 11:05:22 -0400 Received: from mail-fx0-f158.google.com ([209.85.220.158]:60241 "EHLO mail-fx0-f158.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1763665AbZD3PFU (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Apr 2009 11:05:20 -0400 Received: by fxm2 with SMTP id 2so1872941fxm.37 for ; Thu, 30 Apr 2009 08:05:19 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=Zp/OXOSmNxCKkZKHCC1nJonVnQV9uZnMss1wnbfbSNg=; b=xumRleOkVNPfnfSuXUiSb8THX1gFnVO3ONhTC3UdxcPq6oU6V9Kj4vER9X3A/1Qz3e sxQ1ftslTnStZgTz74gP3pkku+ubbvUPilJEaFauy58ooFjJVZaIqL8yQ/QxpvMoeAFk DXetRs+yZ3sgpRQfa/shyHxTPbqVVEfw1mNvw= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=vhB6L62bIlUnWQNNKlfmVdZAyO7jYC71H1Xgcb2axpco4Js0I8SnpWVZnIYj7vbesU MAxSJBzUcl6Jf1Jg72KvvpsA/3btLxi26ijoPv6OgyyMADSFq6fcMMXSk1TGe2fe+ApS fZZ8DmFVfDd5jzVLWcXnZfa1aldx+sdLT1lyM= Received: by 10.103.182.3 with SMTP id j3mr1015346mup.107.1241103919425; Thu, 30 Apr 2009 08:05:19 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20090430142635.GB23550@coredump.intra.peff.net> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 4:26 PM, Jeff King wrote: > On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 02:34:43PM +0200, Michael Gaber wrote: > >> > So merging 'b1' into master removed the B file even if in branch 'b1' >> > I restored it. >> > >> > Could anybody explain me why this is the correct behaviour and why not >> > file 'B' is not restored as it was done in branch 'b1' ? >> >> well, I'd say the thing is, that in b1 there is no change at all to the >> tree anymore, so when applied to master (without B) there is no b restored > > That is exactly it. Git's 3-way merge doesn't look at the intervening > history at all. It looks _only_ at the two endpoints and their > merge-base (well, that is a bit of a simplification, as there may be > multiple merge-bases, but it is what is happening here). > Well, obviously it's how git works since it's what I got. But the question was more about if the cortectness of the end result: should 'B' removed after the merge. IOW if someone works on its own branch remove B file and thought it was a bad idea and restore it whereas another person remove B file but miss the fact that it was a bad idea, does the merge should silently remove B file ? -- Francis