From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/9] Fix git patch header processing in git-apply. Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2005 18:34:44 -0700 Message-ID: <7vbr3g5hsb.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> References: <11252426672473-git-send-email-robfitz@273k.net> <7vslwtein3.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <20050829235823.GA19351@localhost> <7vacj06xi6.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Robert Fitzsimons , git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Aug 30 03:36:08 2005 Return-path: Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1E9v1h-0006Mx-7l for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Tue, 30 Aug 2005 03:35:01 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750766AbVH3Beq (ORCPT ); Mon, 29 Aug 2005 21:34:46 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750804AbVH3Beq (ORCPT ); Mon, 29 Aug 2005 21:34:46 -0400 Received: from fed1rmmtao09.cox.net ([68.230.241.30]:63660 "EHLO fed1rmmtao09.cox.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750766AbVH3Beq (ORCPT ); Mon, 29 Aug 2005 21:34:46 -0400 Received: from assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net ([68.4.9.127]) by fed1rmmtao09.cox.net (InterMail vM.6.01.04.00 201-2131-118-20041027) with ESMTP id <20050830013446.JBJI7275.fed1rmmtao09.cox.net@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>; Mon, 29 Aug 2005 21:34:46 -0400 To: Linus Torvalds In-Reply-To: (Linus Torvalds's message of "Mon, 29 Aug 2005 18:24:40 -0700 (PDT)") 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: Linus Torvalds writes: > On Mon, 29 Aug 2005, Junio C Hamano wrote: >> >> I, however, am not 100% convinced --ignore-applied is too >> dangerous to be useful in any conceivable use cases, at least >> not yet. For example, you might be cherry-picking a change from >> a foreign branch with 'git-diff-tree -p other~45 | git apply', >> where the current branch may have already aquired part of the >> changes that foreign branch contains since 45 generations ago. > > .. and that's why we use a three-way merge, and not diffs, to merge two > branches. .. and that's why I recently rewrote revert, cherry-pick and rebase to use three-way merge as well ;-). The code is simple enough and I see some beauty in it, but I honor your veto, at least for now.