Re: Merges without bases

From: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Date: Aug 26, 2005, 08:00 UTC
Message-ID: <7vzmr5gmb4.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.63.0508252333550.23242@iabervon.org>

Daniel Barkalow <barkalow@iabervon.org> writes:

Show 8 quoted lines

> I'd still like to revive my idea of having projects overlaid on each
> other, where the commits in the project that absorbed the other project
> say, essentially, "also include this other commit, but any changes to
> those files belong to that branch, not this one". That way, Linus could
> have included gitk in git, but changes to it, even when done in a git
> working tree, would show up in commits that only include gitk. (git
> actually can handle this with the alternative index file mechanism that
> Linus mentioned in a different thread.)

Yes, I would love to see that cleanly done in a way that does not confuse uninitiated (not being sarcastic at all. Just cheering up somebody with a better idea than I have --- I would be lost if I were to be tasked to do it by Emperor Penguin himself or somebody else ;-)).

Tonight I added another root in the git.git repository, but I cheated.

> Definitely post-1.0, of course.

Agreed.