From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2011 23:38:40 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH 12/48] t6036: criss-cross + rename/rename(1to2)/add-source + modify/modify
Message-ID: <7vvcuzcg73.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
In-Reply-To: <1307518278-23814-13-git-send-email-newren@gmail.com>

Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com> writes:

> Now THAT's a corner case.
> ...
> +# criss-cross with rename/rename(1to2)/add-source + resolvable modify/modify:
> +#
> +#      B   D
> +#      o---o
> +#     / \ / \
> +#  A o   X   ? F
> +#     \ / \ /
> +#      o---o
> +#      C   E
> +#
> +#   Commit A: new file: a
> +#   Commit B: rename a->b
> +#   Commit C: rename a->c, add different a
> +#   Commit D: merge B&C, keeping b&c and (new) a modified at beginning
> +#   Commit E: merge B&C, keeping b&c and (new) a modified at end

THAT may be a corner case, but is it a useful corner case?  What on earth
the person who did D (or E) was thinking to keep both b and c that are
derived from A:a to begin with?

> +test_expect_failure 'correctly resolves criss-cross with rename/rename/add and modify/modify conflict' '

I won't repeat the same two comments here from reviews for the previous
patches.