On 13-04-29 05:15 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Marc Branchaud <marcn...@xiplink.com> writes:
>> This started out as an attempt to make the backward compatibility notes
>> more parsable, but then I just kept going...
> Thanks.
>>   * "git bundle" did not like a bundle created using a commit without
>> -   any message as its one of the prerequistes.
>> +   any message, as it is one of the prerequistes.
> This is actually saying a different thing.  
> When you create a bundle, you can say "you can only unbundle this in
> a repository that has commit X", with "git bundle create $name ^X Y
> Z".  Such a commit X is called the bundle's prerequisite.  You can
> have more than one prerequisite, e.g. "... ^X ^W Y Z".
> But if you create a bundle by using a commit that does not have any
> message as X (i.e. the bundle's prerequisite), the "git bundle" did
> not like to read the resulting bundle output.
> So <a commit <without any message> as its (bundle's) one of the
> prerequisites> is what the original wanted to say.  The rewrite
> makes it read like "For a commit, having a message is a requirement
> to be used in a bundle", at least to me.

Thanks, I did get that wrong.

CC'ing Lukas, who wrote the relevant commit (5446e33f35).

How about:

* "git bundle" can create a bundle that has a commit without a message as
  a prerequisite, but it could not work with such a bundle.


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to