On Sun, 17 Apr 2005, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > Yes. I'm not opposed to yours, I was just opposed to some of the things > around it you did, so I wrote mine as a kind of place-holder. I'll happily > take patches to turn it from a rally simple and stupid one into a more > polished version. Btw, before I forget - I did have another reason. I actually think that the date is potentially a lot more important than "how many parents deep". In particular, it's entirely possible that the top of my head might be a veru recent merge that merges with a small fix relative to a very old parent (making that old parent be just two hops away from the head), while the thing I want to merge might also have that old parent (for similar reasons) as a relatively "close" parent from a pure link-counting standpoint. The reason I bring this up is that quite often people end up basing their work on a specific release version, so a merge (especially in specialized areas) may thus bring such an old parent pretty close to the head, and it can actually be quite possible (indeed probable) that such a parent ends up being a common parent. However, it can easily be a very _bad_ parent. In ascii barfic: ----------------------- patch --------- / \ / \ - old release -- ... lots of development .. -----HEAD \ \ \ \ \ ---------------------patch-- MERGE-HEAD \ / .. lots of development .. / it looks like "old release" is pretty close to both HEAD and MERGE-HEAD, right? But that's just an artifact of the fact that they both had a trivial merge against some older code, and if the two "lots of development" things have ever done an earlier merge, there's quite possibly a _much_ better common parent there somewhere. I dunno. Linus - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.htmlReceived on Mon Apr 18 06:55:02 2005
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2005-04-18 06:55:03 EST