On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 08:21:25AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Eugeniu Rosca <erosca@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > So, the two approaches lead to different results. If you see any false > > assumption or mistaken belief, could you please pinpoint that? TIA. > > Perhaps the assumption/belief that the set of commits in a history > can be totally ordered is the issue? When multiple people work > together on a project, especially in a project where "pull --no-ff" > is not enforced, there can exist only partial order among them? > As in if you have history with two branches D / \ B C \ / A commits B and C are not comparable. They are both between A and D but the order of B and C is arbitrary. Different renderings of the history may choose different order of B and C. This is a simle example. Linux history is a spaghetti of tens of branches. Thanks Michal
