Re: Octopus merge: unique (?) to git, but is it useful?

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

 



On Tue, 3 June 2008, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> 
>> Actually, it's trivial to convert to other SCM's, although I guess the 
>> conversion tools haven't really tried. You can always turn it into a 
>> series of multiple merges. Yes, you lose information, but it's not like 
>> you lose a huge amount.
> 
> One thing to worry about is what tree object you would give to each of
> these "artificially split" merge commits, though.

There shouldn't be, I think, a problem if octopus merge was done using
'octopus' merge strategy, which requires IIRC tree-level (trivial)
merge.  But true, it is a complication, unless we fake history more,
and always use result for octopus merge as a tree.

-- 
Jakub Narebski
Poland
--
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]

  Powered by Linux