From: Matthieu Moy <matthieu.moy@imag.fr>
Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2008 21:25:22 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix incorrect wording in git-merge.txt.
Message-ID: <vpqwsojlcu5.fsf@bauges.imag.fr>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.1.00.0803031519360.2899@xanadu.home>

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.

-- 
Matthieu