Re: Signed tags in octopus merge..

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 2:49 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
>> Just a heads-up and congrats: octopus merges of signed tags work well,
>> and did exactly the RightThing(tm), both at merge time and with
>> "--show-signature".
>>
>> I knew it was supposed to work, but I have to admit that I was a bit
>> apprehensive about it when I tried.
>>
>> Current top-of-head (commit 81d48f0aee54) in the kernel, in case you care.
>
> I looked at it again, and it makes me wonder if we should further reword
> it to say "side branch #1, tagged 'devicetree-for-linus'" instead of the
> current "parent #2, tagged 'devicetree-for-linus'". It looks very weird to
> start counting from #2, when we know we will never show #1 there.
>

My immediate thought regarding the "side branch #1" version is not
wanting to have to do the math (even though it's a simple n+1), if I
decide to convert that text into ^ parent selection notation.

-- 
Jacob Helwig
http://technosorcery.net/about/me
--
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


[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]