From: Bagas Sanjaya Date: Thu, 20 May 2021 11:32:42 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 02/13] Documentation/technical: describe remembering renames optimization Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <4246d0193fed5ff522fb2c442bd779973701c078.1621490982.git.gitgitgadget@gmail.com> On 20/05/21 13.09, Elijah Newren via GitGitGadget wrote: > +Outline: > + > + 0. Assumptions > + > + 1. How rebasing and cherry-picking work > + > + 2. Why the renames on MERGE_SIDE1 in any given pick are *always* a > + superset of the renames on MERGE_SIDE1 for the next pick. > + > + 3. Why any rename on MERGE_SIDE1 in any given pick is _almost_ always also > + a rename on MERGE_SIDE1 for the next pick > + > + 4. A detailed description of the the counter-examples to #3. > + > + 5. Why the special cases in #4 are still fully reasonable to use to pair > + up files for three-way content merging in the merge machinery, and why > + they do not affect the correctness of the merge. > + > + 6. Interaction with skipping of "irrelevant" renames > + > + 7. Additional items that need to be cached > + > + 8. How directory rename detection interacts with the above and why this > + optimization is still safe even if merge.directoryRenames is set to > + "true". > + > + For item 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, it seems that you form question sentences but ended with dot, instead of question mark (?). Are these question sentences or descriptive sentences? > +=== 0. Assumptions === > + > +There are two assumptions that will hold throughout this document: > + > + * The upstream side where commits are transplanted to is treated as the > + first parent side when rebase/cherry-pick call the merge machinery > + > + * All merges are fully automatic > + Did you mean that "fully automatic" merges are merges that can be done without conflicts? -- An old man doll... just what I always wanted! - Clara