Re: [PATCH] Simplified GIT usage guide
- From
C. Scott Ananian <cscott@laptop.org>
- Date
- Dec 19, 2008, 17:08 UTC
- Message-ID
- <c6d9bea0812190908k223b6156j238763baeda8a0b7@mail.gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <494B68B8.20107@drmicha.warpmail.net>
On Fri, Dec 19, 2008 at 4:26 AM, Michael J Gruber <git@drmicha.warpmail.net> wrote:
Show 14 quoted lines
> C. Scott Ananian venit, vidit, dixit 19.12.2008 01:47: >> On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 1:28 PM, David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com> wrote: >>> Add a guide to using GIT's simpler features. >>> diff --git a/Documentation/git-haters-guide.txt b/Documentation/git-haters-guide.txt >>> +In the above example, I've assumed that you've got your own tree with the head >>> +at commit C3, and that you've got a branch that you want to merge, which has >>> +its head at commit B3. After merging them, you'd end up with a directed, >>> +cyclic tree: >> >> That should be, "acyclic". There are no cycles, because the graph is directed. > > Well, directed graphs can have cycles. But the revision graph of a > revision control system has to be an acyclic directed graph. Otherwise > parenthood would be a complicated matter ;)
I mean that the example given didn't have a cycle (even though it has nodes arranged in a circle) because of the orientation of the edges. But you're right, "directed acyclic graph" is a better correction; the nodes in git do not form a tree. --scott
--
( http://cscott.net/ )