On Thursday 22 April 2010, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Johan Herland <johan@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > Ok, I'm just worried that it'll force us to re-implement much of the > > three- way merge logic that's already implemented in the merge > > machinery. > > There is no way around it, as long as you have that variable fan-out in > the notes structure. Changing and unstabilizing "merge" for dubious > benefit of code reuse is unacceptable, as the part that deals with > variable fan-out has no benefit to the regular "merge". Understood. At some point I merely contemplated whether a generic "tree_filter" callback could be added somewhere in the merge machinery, and then whether flattening the fanout could be implemented as such a "tree_filter" (with an inverse "tree_filter" for reconstructing the fanout in the merge result). But it seems the costs outweigh the benefits, even more so as I don't yet see any other use case for such a "tree_filter". In any case, you have already given me lots of other/better options on how to implement 'git notes merge'. Thanks! :) ...Johan -- Johan Herland, <johan@xxxxxxxxxxx> www.herland.net -- 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