Alp Toker wrote:
Signed-off-by: Alp Toker <alp@xxxxxxxxxx> --- Documentation/git-svn.txt | 2 +- Documentation/urls.txt | 2 +- 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
My patch was made against the 'next' branch, where the file had recently been moved to Documentation/git-svn.txt, but it was applied to the 'master' branch where the file still exists at contrib/git-svn/git-svn.txt as it has not yet been moved.
As a result, it seems that only the modification to Documentation/urls.txt in this patch made it into the repository, with the fix to Documentation/git-svn.txt having been silently omitted.
By the time the commit was merged from 'master' to 'next', it had permanently lost the modification to git-svn.txt, and even though the commit message claims to "Fix some doubled word typos" it only fixes one.
Could this situation have been avoided if the patch had mentioned that it was against the 'next' branch? Should/does git warn the user if a patch modifies files that don't exist? Would rename tracking have helped this patch to apply properly?
- : send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html