Peter Baumann schrieb: > On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 05:07:53PM +0100, Johannes Sixt wrote: >> Peter Baumann schrieb: >>> On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 07:59:19AM +0100, Johannes Sixt wrote: >>>> If I were to re-merge topic into master a second time after this >>>> situation, I would install a temporary graft that removes the second >>>> parent of M and repeat the merge. After the graft is removed, the history >>>> would look like this: >>>> >>>> B --- C --- D --------------. [topic] >>>> / \ \ >>>> A --- ... --- M ... --- U ... N [master] >>>> >>>> Are there any downsides? I don't know - I haven't thought it through. >>>> >>> Might be. If there is any branch starting anywhere in between M and U >>> which also needs to merge [topic] will also cause you headaches :-) >>> >>> B --- C --- D --------------. [topic] >>> / \ \ >>> A --- ... --- M ... --- U ... N [master] >>> \ >>> x --- y [side_branch wich needs to merge topic] >> ?? I don't follow you. The side branch already contains the topic. What do >> you want to merge? >> > > Won't it loose the revert 'U' after merging side_branch back to master? > > Ah. Looking at the picture more closely, I could answer myself and say it would > only cause a huge mergeconflict, won't it?. No. N and the merge-base of N and y are identical (wrt changes introduced by B,C,D). At least this part will not cause any conflicts. -- Hannes -- To unsubscribe from this list: 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