From: Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org>
Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2008 22:10:59 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix incorrect wording in git-merge.txt.
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.1.00.0803031706320.2899@xanadu.home>
In-Reply-To: <vpqwsojlcu5.fsf@bauges.imag.fr>

On Mon, 3 Mar 2008, Matthieu Moy wrote:

> Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org> writes:
> 
> >> Now, I don't understand the distinction you seem to be making between
> >> "commit" and "commit object".
> >
> > Objects are what the low level storage is made of.  Conceptually, The 
> > merge operation doesn't work at the object level, but rather at the 
> > history graph level.
> 
> I still don't get the distinction. What is the "graph" if not a set of
> objects pointing to each other?
> 
> If you don't want to talk about commit object, then you should fix
> also user-manual.txt (for example, it states that a merge "create a
> commit object in the history").
> 
> Well, that said, the same sentence as the one I propose without
> "object" is fine to me, but I just don't understand the difference.

Sorry.  I don't have enough free time to pursue this point, nor do I 
consider it important enough.  So if no one else feels like the 
distinction deserves to be made then I won't care anymore either.


Nicolas