From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andreas Schwab Subject: Re: Specifying revisions in the future Date: Mon, 06 Feb 2012 00:08:37 +0100 Message-ID: References: <201202052324.59941.jnareb@gmail.com> <178AA8FDB02246D9AA9416C0D54E51A8@PhilipOakley> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Cc: "Jakub Narebski" , "Matthieu Moy" , , To: "Philip Oakley" X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon Feb 06 00:08:51 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RuBCS-0000AJ-6z for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Mon, 06 Feb 2012 00:08:48 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754542Ab2BEXIl (ORCPT ); Sun, 5 Feb 2012 18:08:41 -0500 Received: from mail-out.m-online.net ([212.18.0.9]:53030 "EHLO mail-out.m-online.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754201Ab2BEXIi (ORCPT ); Sun, 5 Feb 2012 18:08:38 -0500 Received: from frontend1.mail.m-online.net (unknown [192.168.8.180]) by mail-out.m-online.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 01CB71C1D9E3; Mon, 6 Feb 2012 00:08:38 +0100 (CET) X-Auth-Info: 0W77CrBhY88jRobsdIgjnH7y2YRXt68zISFMt9ulPdk= Received: from igel.home (ppp-88-217-114-0.dynamic.mnet-online.de [88.217.114.0]) by mail.mnet-online.de (Postfix) with ESMTPA id E7CF51C00040; Mon, 6 Feb 2012 00:08:37 +0100 (CET) Received: by igel.home (Postfix, from userid 501) id AA2B3CA29F; Mon, 6 Feb 2012 00:08:37 +0100 (CET) X-Yow: RHAPSODY in Glue! In-Reply-To: <178AA8FDB02246D9AA9416C0D54E51A8@PhilipOakley> (Philip Oakley's message of "Sun, 5 Feb 2012 22:58:43 -0000") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.93 (gnu/linux) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: "Philip Oakley" writes: > Is there also a rule missing for X+2, viewed from D, in this example > >X<---Y<---Z<--- > \ \ >A<----B<----C<----D This is difficult to interpret since it has some extra indent, let's assume that Z is the second parent of D and Y the second parent of B. > as to which order the first parent rule should _not_ be applied when D's > first parent chain doesn't reach X (it reaches A). > Using 'oldest' first for alternate parent testing would make X+2 = B, > whilst 'newest' first would make X+2=Z. I have used the chain order for > newest/oldest', rather than commit date. The rule should be to follow the leftmost parent as far as possible. That means that X+2->D is B. Andreas. -- Andreas Schwab, schwab@linux-m68k.org GPG Key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756 01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5 "And now for something completely different."