Re: Following renames
- From
Petr Baudis <pasky@suse.cz>
- Date
- Mar 26, 2006, 22:31 UTC
- Message-ID
- <20060326223154.GU18185@pasky.or.cz>
- In-Reply-To
- <Pine.LNX.4.64.0603261415390.15714@g5.osdl.org>
Dear diary, on Mon, Mar 27, 2006 at 12:22:04AM CEST, I got a letter where Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org> said that...
> So commit "6" is uninteresting, and commit "5" will never even be > looked at, since we decided that the history of "d" comes from the > first parent with the same contents.
And this is the thing I have a problem with - this does not make much sense to me, why can't we just follow all parents instead of arbitrarily choosing one of them?
> which is correct (now, there are other histories _too_ that get us to the > same point, but the one you found this way was _a_ history).
Ok, in that case I want the _full_ history. :-)
> No, it's the expected output just because you expected merges to always > show up. Merges get ignored if any of the parents have the same content > already.
Eek. Can I avoid that? What was the reason for choosing this behavior?
-- Petr "Pasky" Baudis Stuff: http://pasky.or.cz/ Right now I am having amnesia and deja-vu at the same time. I think I have forgotten this before.