Re: rsync update appears broken now

From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Date: 2005-10-21 10:19:42
On Fri, 21 Oct 2005, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> > 
> > Oh, they'll need to revert if they want to match Junios history. Otherwise 
> > they'll always generate yet another merge when they pull.
> 
> So?

History matters. History matters as much as the data does.

> It does not have to be a fast-forward. After all, what is another merge? 
> Since that merge does not have Junio as committer, close inspection of 
> the commit will reveal that.

It _does_ have to be a fast-forward, if you expect the tree to have the 
same content as Junio's.

Even if it merges everything automatically, if the history is different, 
it could in theory at least merge _differently_ than what Junio had. Plus 
you'll have a really ugly version history for no good reason.

But yes, it will _work_. It just won't work the way people expect it to, 
so they'll make bug-reports about not being able to merge automatically, 
and others will say that they can't re-create it and blame the wrong 
person.

		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.html
Received on Fri Oct 21 10:20:51 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2005-10-21 10:20:54 EST