From: Dilip M <dilipm79@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 07 Nov 2009 03:41:11 GMT
Subject: Re: Preserving branches after merging on ancestor
Message-ID: <c94f8e120911061941l1fb62d84g9a5ba3f1a00d9156@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <1257520877359-3959325.post@n2.nabble.com>

On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 8:51 PM, rhlee <richard@webdezign.co.uk> wrote:

> Hi John, Björn and Eric,
>
> Thank you very much for your replies from which I gained a lot insight about
> git merging and different workflows.
>
> Yes, I have tried out --no-ff and it does the job for me. (Incidentally, doing
> that take it look neater in git gui as all the master nodes appear on top of
> each other. Using empty commits, the merged branches appear on top the master
> nodes in the graph.)

Thanks to Richard, John, Björn, and Eric.

I had a similar _confusion_ looking looking at graph. I always use "log --graph
--pretty=oneline". Now I have _opted_ to pull/merge with '--no-ff', to keep the
graph plain and simple for non-power users :)



-- Dilip