do not worry, I found the instructions: https://git-scm.com/docs/SubmittingPatches; also just realized that Kristofer Haugsbakk already submitted a patch (initially I thought his email was just a response). We are all good now. Thanks for your time. Min On Sun, May 21, 2023 at 3:28 PM Minnie Shi <minnie.shi@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi All, > > What is the procedure to update the document to correct the error? As > I responded yesterday, see below. we need to change the error. > > From: Minnie Shi <minnie.shi@xxxxxxxxx> > Date: Sat, May 20, 2023 at 11:41 AM > Subject: Re: [PATCH] doc: merge: fix mention of `ORIG_HEAD` > To: Kristoffer Haugsbakk <code@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: <git@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Kristoffer Haugsbakk <code@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > Okay, i read one more time, i think it should be read as > > Before the operation, > -`ORIG_HEAD` is set to the tip of the "current" branch (`G`) > > instead of > Before the operation, > -`ORIG_HEAD` is set to the tip of the "current" branch (`C`) > > Kind regards, > Mi > > On Sun, May 21, 2023 at 2:23 PM Sergey Organov <sorganov@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > > > Minnie Shi <minnie.shi@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > > > >> in summary the sentence should be read as > > >> > > >> Before the operation, ORIG_HEAD is set to the tip of the current branch (H). > > >> instead of > > >> Before the operation, ORIG_HEAD is set to the tip of the current branch (C). > > > > > > Not C but G (i.e. the tip _before_ the history is updated). > > > > > > I notice that we overuse "current" there. One is to refer to the > > > most recent commit on a branch, the other is to refer to the branch > > > that is checked out. For the former, we say "the tip" in the other > > > sentence, and it probably will make it less ambiguous if used that > > > phrase. > > > > > > Then "`git merge topic`" will replay the changes made on the > > > `topic` branch since it diverged from `master` (i.e., `E`) until > > > the commit at the tip of the `topic` (`C`) on top of `master`, > > > and record the result > > > in a new commit along with the names of the two parent commits and > > > a log message from the user describing the changes. Before the operation, > > > `ORIG_HEAD` is set to the tip of the current branch (`G`). > > > > > > My reading also hiccupped with "replay"; the first sentence to > > > explain the command says "incorporate the changes", and that may be > > > a less confusing expression; "replay" somehow makes me imagine that > > > the changes are cherry-picked one by one---it may be only me, so I > > > left it as-is in the suggestion above. > > > > For me "apply changes" or even "apply cumulative changes" works much > > better than "replay changes" in this context, especially provided we > > will apparently have "git replay" soon. > > > > Thanks, > > -- Sergey Organov > > > > -- > Kind regards > Min -- Kind regards Min
