From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2013 20:11:25 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] merge-base: teach "--fork-point" mode
Message-ID: <xmqq61sfet1u.fsf@gitster.dls.corp.google.com>
In-Reply-To: <20131029085111.GA24023@serenity.lan>

John Keeping <john@keeping.me.uk> writes:

> OK - given this reasoning I agree that --fork-point makes sense.
>
> I think this would have been clearer if the short description said
> something like:
>
>     Find the point at which a branch forked from another branch; this
>     does not just look for the common ancestor of the two commits but
>     also takes into account the reflog of <ref> to see if the branch
>     forked from an earlier incarnation.

That's much easier to read. Will squash the following in (I do want
to make sure that it is clear that <commit> does not have to be at
the tip, and also <ref> does not have to be a branch---it could be
any ref).

Thanks.

 --fork-point::
-	Given a commit that is derived from possibly an earlier
-	incarnation of a ref, find an appropriate fork-point of the
-	derived history to rebase it on top of an updated base
-	history (see discussion on this mode below).
+	Find the point at which a branch (or any history that leads
+	to <commit>) forked from another branch (or any reference)
+	<ref>. This does not just look for the common ancestor of
+	the two commits, but also takes into account the reflog of
+	<ref> to see if the history leading to <commit> forked from
+	an earlier incarnation of the branch <ref> (see discussion
+	on this mode below).
 
 OPTIONS
 -------