On Wed, 15 Nov 2006, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Nicolas Pitre <nico@xxxxxxx> writes: > > > On Wed, 15 Nov 2006, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > > >> I am wondering if that could be "git merge <committish>..." > >> instead. I do not care too much about the ... part (i.e. an > >> Octopus), but I often find myself doing: > >> > >> git checkout next > >> git merge "Merge early part of branch 'foo'" HEAD foo~3 > >> > >> when earlier part of "foo" topic are worthy to be in 'next' but > >> not the later ones. > > > > Indeed ! > > Indeed, what? What you propose would be excellent indeed. > That means that updated "git merge" (not the current one) would > not be able to assume it's parameter is a branch name, and still > has to come up with the merge message "Merge <branch>". > > Merging only within the local branch namespace already has the > problem you need to solve to come up with a nicely formatted > "Merge <branch> of <remote repository>" some way. I am not > saying that this is unsolvable (you can look at remotes/ files > to see what remote tracking branch the branch is about), but > something you need to keep in mind when implementing the > improved "git merge". Right. But that is an _implementation_ detail, not a usability issue. Nicolas - 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