From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/2] Fix parent rewriting in --early-output Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2007 00:48:16 -0800 Message-ID: <7v1wauv8dr.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> References: <18211.59478.188419.397886@cargo.ozlabs.ibm.com> <18218.63946.772767.179841@cargo.ozlabs.ibm.com> <18221.14113.498416.396006@cargo.ozlabs.ibm.com> <7v1wauzomr.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Paul Mackerras , Marco Costalba , Git Mailing List To: Linus Torvalds X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Nov 13 09:48:46 2007 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 1IrrRu-000331-1A for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Tue, 13 Nov 2007 09:48:46 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750933AbXKMIsY (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Nov 2007 03:48:24 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750896AbXKMIsY (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Nov 2007 03:48:24 -0500 Received: from sceptre.pobox.com ([207.106.133.20]:53345 "EHLO sceptre.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750764AbXKMIsX (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Nov 2007 03:48:23 -0500 Received: from sceptre (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by sceptre.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 485252FA; Tue, 13 Nov 2007 03:48:44 -0500 (EST) Received: from pobox.com (ip68-225-240-77.oc.oc.cox.net [68.225.240.77]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by sceptre.sasl.smtp.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 97F0193ECE; Tue, 13 Nov 2007 03:48:39 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: (Linus Torvalds's message of "Mon, 12 Nov 2007 23:16:08 -0800 (PST)") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Linus Torvalds writes: > This solves the problem quite naturally, because any tree that hasn't been > parsed - or even if it *has* been parsed, but just hasn't gone through > the compare function - will then always be seen as "different" and thus > interesting. > > This fairly straight-forward patch seems to work. It *replaces* the > pervious "patch 4/2", and yes, Junio, I think you were very right to > complain about that one. > > How does this one feel? I think this is very natural and I like it. I did not complain but just said I was puzzled, but after thinking about this a bit I probably should have ;-).