Re: MinGW port - initial work uploaded

From: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Date: Jan 24, 2007, 10:24 UTC
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.63.0701241121380.22628@wbgn013.biozentrum.uni-wuerzburg.de>
In-Reply-To: <7vk5zdhv5r.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>

Hi,

On Tue, 23 Jan 2007, Junio C Hamano wrote:

Show 13 quoted lines

> Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> writes:
> 
> > Seriously again, the users of merge-index are
> >
> > git-merge, which I do not really understand
> >
> > What I am nervous about is git-merge.
> 
> I think you are referring to the "carry forward local change"
> logic in 'next'.
> 
> First of all, BAD DSCHO.  You should be looking at 'master', not
> 'next' during -rc period ;-).

Guilty on all accounts. Actually, I am not looking at 'next', but on 'my', which is my long-running sidebranch of next, which contains all the scripts I like to run manually, or in cron.

Show 7 quoted lines

> Seriously again, the codepath is taken when the merge is a fast
> forward to another commit (iow, our HEAD is an ancestor of the
> other branch, so we will end up updating the branch tip with the
> tip of the other branch).  The use of merge-index there can be
> replaced when we use merge-recursive instead of the 3-way
> "read-tree -m" the same way as how "checkout -m" implements the
> branch switching with local changes.

Aha. The use of merge-recursive would be really easy, if we did not write $GIT_DIR/LOCAL_DIFF, but $GIT_DIR/TEMP_BRANCH or $GIT_DIR/LOCAL_TREE... Just teasing you...

Ciao, Dscho