Quoting "Raimund Berger" <raimund.berger@xxxxxxxxx>: > The question is whether a (3way) merge is commutative, purely in terms > of content (i.e. disregarding commit history for now). Iow if no matter > in which order I merge A and B, i.e. A into B or B into A, I'd be > guaranteed to arrive at the same content. I think three-way merge of A into B and B into A will produce the same result when the merge doesn't conflict (when it does, you will get the conflict markers and text from A and B in a different order depending on the direction of the merge). > The reason I ask is obvious I guess. What basically interests me is if I > gave a bunch of topic branches exposure on a test branch and, after > resolving issues, applied them to stable, that I could be 100% sure to > not introduce new issues content wise just by applying merges in a > different order or form (rebase, patch set). I don't think you can make a blanket conclusion like that by only knowing that merging A into B and merging B into A would produce the same result. If you merge topics A, B, and C in this order into your current state O, there may not be any conflict, but if you merge the same topics to the same current state in different order, C, B and then A for example, you may get conflicts that breaks the merge. The commutativeness only says that merge of A into O will produce the same result as merge of O into A. It doesn't say anything about what would happen when you merge B to O. -- Nanako Shiraishi http://ivory.ap.teacup.com/nanako3/ -- 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
