Re: [PATCH v2] pull: merge into unborn by fast-forwarding from empty tree
On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 02:45:04PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Show 7 quoted lines
> Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:
>
> > I think I got us off-track with my expectation of ending the one case
> > with a conflicted index. But caring about that is even more unlikely. I
> > think Thomas's original patch is probably a happy medium.
>
> OK, so should I consider it Reviewed-by: peff?
Yes, modulo the breakage of the &&- chain that Thomas mentioned.
Show 6 quoted lines
> > As an orthogonal matter, we probably should reverse the order of
> > updating HEAD and the index/working tree, as it does not make much sense
> > to me to do the former if the latter is not possible (and that is the
> > case even with the current code).
>
> Yes.
OK. I'll prepare a series with both patches. Stand by...
-Peff
Jeff King <peff@peff.net>