Re: who's on first? - following first parent and merge-management

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Mar 8, 2012, 22:52 UTC
Message-ID: <7vaa3qbt9e.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
In-Reply-To: <20120308074911.GA23712@burratino>

Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com> writes:

Show 19 quoted lines

> Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
>> Given the above definition, the first thing to realize is that "the
>> first parent" is primarily a local concept.
> [... and much nice explanation ...]
>
> Would you mind including this explanation as a new file with some name
> like <Documentation/howto/using-first-parent.txt>?  I think the quoted
> explanation is very clear and I have not come up with any obvious
> tweaks to make to it, which is why I am simply suggesting this instead
> of sending a patch that would repeat the same text.
>
> Strawman abstract:
>
> | From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
> | Date: Wed, 07 Mar 2012 22:13:46 -0800
> | Subject: who's on first? - following first parent and merge-management
> | Abstract: In this article, JC describes the "log --first-parent" and
> |  "merge --no-ff" options and what kind of history makes them useful.

Everything I write here is open source, so in that sense I wouldn't mind, but I have a suspicion that building on existing gitworkflows document might be more appropriate, as opposed to a self-contained standalone document that has to be read by readers in addition to the other existing documents. The current gitworkflows document is detailed in describing how the history is built, but is fairly lacking in description on how the resulting history can be studied.