From: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Date: Sun, 20 May 2007 08:27:41 GMT
Subject: Re: merge summaries
Message-ID: <7vwsz3rjb6.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>
In-Reply-To: <0E590255-A3F4-4D36-B798-80364ACD0D06@zib.de>

Steffen Prohaska <prohaska@zib.de> writes:

> But this is true not only for the upstream master but for every branch.
> The first-parent-path of any commit documents (at least in summaries)
> which features were introduced to the branch at which place. If a
> topic pulls from upstream, features already available in the upstream
> are introduced to the topic at this time. Why not summarize this?

Strictly speaking, it is not even correct with the upstream
master.  I believe even my own 'maint' has fast forward merge
that I pulled from other people, and that part of the history if
you follow first-parent, you would not be following the "project's"
history (if there is such a thing, and if you are equating it
with "JC's view of the history").