From: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2005 03:26:21 GMT
Subject: Re: baffled again
Message-ID: <7vzmr63deq.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0508241152240.3317@g5.osdl.org>

Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org> writes:

> In fact, the case that git selected ("patch applied"), is not only the one
> that is very fundamentally the one git will always select in this kind of
> situation - in some respects is actually the nicer choice of the two.

While I appreciate the excuse for not taking immediate and hasty
action, I have two problems with your analysis.

 * I am not yet convinced that it is _not_ by accident that git
   ended up choosing the nicer choice of the two.

 * Even if it does always choose the nicer choice of the two,
   Tony was lucky (no pun intended).  Rather, we were lucky that
   Tony was observant.  A careless merger may well have easily
   missed this mismerge (from the human point of view).