On Wed, Aug 25, 2010 at 3:31 PM, Elijah Newren <newren@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Sure, they will modify paths outside your subtree, but you know that > you didn't do so. So if you neglect renames then the situation is > pretty simple: > .... > > Unless, of course, I'm missing something still... I remember it! So there are two points: the "no changes outside narrow tree from "you"" assumption and whether it is trivial to do a merge outside narrow tree without whole trees. The first point. That assumption holds if user clones, starts working, then does "pull origin". But if user merges another branch, say "next" into "master", the common commit may be somewhere down in history and there may be changes outside narrow tree from both "you" and "upstream" (though user does not make those changes). The second point (probably not needed if the above assumption is no longer true, but I post anyway in case I forget it again). Without whole trees, it's impossible to determine a trivial merge reliably. If "you" adds a file and "upstream" adds another file, predecessor trees will look different but merging them is trivial (at file level). If we miss some trees that lead to those new files, the best thing we can do is to claim it non-trivial. -- Duy -- 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