Sorry, I meant to CC the list. See below. On Sat, Jul 28, 2012 at 9:56 PM, Martin von Zweigbergk <martin.von.zweigbergk@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 11:52 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> writes: >> >> It seems to have some interaction with your other topic, though. >> These two patches alone will pass the existing tests, but merging it >> with mz/rebase-range breaks t3412. I didn't look into it, but >> perhaps this breaks "git cherry" in some way? > > Yes, it breaks "git cherry" quite badly, by not ignoring merges at > all. I incorrectly assumed that ignore_merges was about revision > traversal, but now I think it's only diff output from 'git log' (and > possibly others). What I think tricked me was seeing that > "ignore_merges = 1" closely followed by a comment saying "ignore > merges". But now I think the explicit code to "ignore merges" is > necessary (as show by the failing test case), but can be replaced by > "rev_info.max_parents = 1". Setting "ignore_merges = 1", OTOH, now > seems doubly redundant: not only does it set the same value as was set > in init_revisions, but it's also irrelevant. Since cherry doesn't > generate any diff output, I think ignore_merges is never used. > Flipping the values of all of "ignore_merges", "combine_merges" and > "diff" does not have any effect on test cases at least. I hope my > explanation makes some sense at least... > > I'll send a reroll when I get time. -- 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