Re: rsync update appears broken now

From: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Date: Oct 21, 2005, 00:01 UTC
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.63.0510210157070.14563@wbgn013.biozentrum.uni-wuerzburg.de>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0510201647490.10477@g5.osdl.org>

Hi,

On Thu, 20 Oct 2005, Linus Torvalds wrote:

Show 7 quoted lines

> On Fri, 21 Oct 2005, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> > 
> > Also, people having merged with (A) would not have to undo that merge as 
> > was suggested. The new (C) commit would contain the revert of (A).
> 
> Oh, they'll need to revert if they want to match Junios history. Otherwise 
> they'll always generate yet another merge when they pull.

So?

> Doesn't matter that the _tree_ state may be the same, the only thing that 
> matters is that their history will be different, and thus they will never 
> be able to fast-forwared to Junio's tree unless they revert their local 
> merge.

It does not have to be a fast-forward. After all, what is another merge? Since that merge does not have Junio as committer, close inspection of the commit will reveal that.

Of course, if you did not have local changes and merged, you might want to do a clean "git-fetch kernel.org +master:parent".

So, no need for a revert.

Ciao, Dscho