Re: rsync update appears broken now
- From
Petr Baudis <pasky@suse.cz>
- Date
- Oct 21, 2005, 00:34 UTC
- Message-ID
- <20051021003449.GZ30889@pasky.or.cz>
- In-Reply-To
- <Pine.LNX.4.64.0510201717100.10477@g5.osdl.org>
Dear diary, on Fri, Oct 21, 2005 at 02:19:42AM CEST, I got a letter where Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org> told me that...
Show 11 quoted lines
> On Fri, 21 Oct 2005, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > > It does not have to be a fast-forward. After all, what is another merge? > > Since that merge does not have Junio as committer, close inspection of > > the commit will reveal that. > > It _does_ have to be a fast-forward, if you expect the tree to have the > same content as Junio's. > > Even if it merges everything automatically, if the history is different, > it could in theory at least merge _differently_ than what Junio had. Plus > you'll have a really ugly version history for no good reason.
And if Junio will want to merge with many of those people, you will better have to get a dualhead for your gitk.
-- Petr "Pasky" Baudis Stuff: http://pasky.or.cz/ VI has two modes: the one in which it beeps and the one in which it doesn't.