Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 10:29 AM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> I wonder if use of remoteheads later in the same function are correct, >> though. We equate "!remoteheads->next" and "We are not doing octopus", >> for example. > > I do think it would generally be a great idea to never use > "remoteheads" at all. An octopus merge that has been simplified to > just two parents isn't really an octopus merge any more. > > So I think you're probably right - we should try to avoid using > remoteheads entirely, and any use is suspect I am still looking at the codepaths involved. It looks feasible, but would affect quite a lot of them to deal with many corner cases, I am afraid. One of the worst is the "traditional merge format" where format-merge-msg is called outside "git merge" to prepare the merge message created by "git pull". We haven't reduced heads at that stage yet, so the message fed to us will list what happened on the redundant branches. -- 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