Re: git merge vs git commit

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

 



Matthieu Moy <Matthieu.Moy@xxxxxxx>:
>
>>Russell King <rmk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Using git 1.5.4.5, I notice that the result from git merge and git commit
>> are different in an unexpected way.
>>
>> Take the following tree:
>>
>>      B---C---D---E2
>>     /
>>   -A1
>>     \
>>      F---G---H---I3
>>
>> (letters represent commits, numbers represent where the references are).
>>
>> Your current head is '1', and you want to merge branches '2' and '3', so
>> you use:
>>
>>      git merge 2 3
>
>AAUI, "git merge 2 3" doesn't mean "merge 2 and 3 together", but
>"merge 2 and 3 with the current HEAD". So, what you wanted was :
>
>git checkout 1
>git merge 2
>
>And what you did was an octopus merge of A, E and I (which ends up
>being the same since A is anyway the common ancestor of E and I).
>
>Now, this doesn't explain why the conflicted merge gives a result
>different from the other.
>

(I'm not on the list, please CC)

Reading the whole thread I think we have an explanation: octupus-merge
learned to remove reduntant parents and does so in the clean merge
case, but merge in general does not it; this is what happens in the
conflict case.

However it remains that three parents are to be expected with the
given user action

Ulrik Sverdrup
--
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