[Fwd: Re: git merge vs git commit]

From: Gustaf Hendeby <hendeby@isy.liu.se>
Date: Sep 9, 2008, 17:58 UTC
Message-ID: <48C6B944.30900@isy.liu.se>

Sorry for the dup Junio, once again hit the wrong button when answering...

/Gustaf

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: git merge vs git commit
Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2008 19:56:20 +0200
From: Gustaf Hendeby <hendeby@isy.liu.se>
To: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
References: <20080909165236.GA8850@flint.arm.linux.org.uk>
<7vhc8p6x59.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org>

On 2008-09-09 19:34, Junio C Hamano wrote:

Show 14 quoted lines

> Russell King <rmk@arm.linux.org.uk> writes:
> 
>> If there aren't any conflicts, you get a nice clean merge, resulting in:
>> ...
>> However, if you have a conflict that needs resolving, you fix it up as
>> ...
>> instead - an additional reference from commit 'K' back to commit 'A'
>> which isn't present in the clean merge case.
>>
>> Is this intentional, or is it a bug?
> 
> I think some changes went into 1.6.0 around this area to (r)eject parents
> that are redundant.  What happens when you use more recent git with the
> same example?

I get the same result with current next. Is this the expected result with this work, or an unwanted side effect?

/Gustaf