Re: Signed tags in octopus merge..

From: Jacob Helwig <jacob@technosorcery.net>
Date: Jan 16, 2012, 22:58 UTC
Message-ID: <CAJ8aY1Hi47uyYSjAmtXfDEqgyc8T21WqXdEA0kGS7SQKxQ5b5g@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <7vobu3uusw.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>

On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 2:49 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:

Show 16 quoted lines

> Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> writes:
>
>> Just a heads-up and congrats: octopus merges of signed tags work well,
>> and did exactly the RightThing(tm), both at merge time and with
>> "--show-signature".
>>
>> I knew it was supposed to work, but I have to admit that I was a bit
>> apprehensive about it when I tried.
>>
>> Current top-of-head (commit 81d48f0aee54) in the kernel, in case you care.
>
> I looked at it again, and it makes me wonder if we should further reword
> it to say "side branch #1, tagged 'devicetree-for-linus'" instead of the
> current "parent #2, tagged 'devicetree-for-linus'". It looks very weird to
> start counting from #2, when we know we will never show #1 there.
>

My immediate thought regarding the "side branch #1" version is not wanting to have to do the math (even though it's a simple n+1), if I decide to convert that text into ^ parent selection notation.

-- 
Jacob Helwig
http://technosorcery.net/about/me