Re: [RFD PATCH 00/32] subtree clone v2

> On Wed, Aug 25, 2010 at 3:31 PM, Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com> wrote:
> I remember it!
>
> So there are two points: the "no changes outside narrow tree from
> "you"" assumption and whether it is trivial to do a merge outside
> narrow tree without whole trees.
>
> The first point. That assumption holds if user clones, starts working,
> then does "pull origin". But if user merges another branch, say "next"
> into "master", the common commit may be somewhere down in history and
> there may be changes outside narrow tree from both "you" and
> "upstream" (though user does not make those changes).

> The second point (probably not needed if the above assumption is no
> longer true, but I post anyway in case I forget it again). Without
> whole trees, it's impossible to determine a trivial merge reliably. If
> "you" adds a file and "upstream" adds another file, predecessor trees
> will look different but merging them is trivial (at file level). If we
> miss some trees that lead to those new files, the best thing we can do
> is to claim it non-trivial.