Re: [PATCH 3/3] fetch --prune: Repair branchname DF conflicts

2013-12-19 Thread Jeff King
On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 07:48:59PM -0600, Tom Miller wrote: I did not intend to introduce new lingo. I did some searching through history to see if something like this had been worked on before and I found a commit by Jeff King that introduced me the the idea of DF conflicts I take all the

Re: [PATCH 3/3] fetch --prune: Repair branchname DF conflicts

2013-12-19 Thread Junio C Hamano
Tom Miller jacker...@gmail.com writes: But what should happen when we do not give --prune to git fetch in such a situation? Should it fail, because we still have frotz/nitfol and we cannot create frotz without losing it? You talk about this to some extent in an email from 2009. I have

[PATCH 3/3] fetch --prune: Repair branchname DF conflicts

2013-12-18 Thread Tom Miller
When a branchname DF conflict occurs during a fetch, --prune should be able to fix it. When fetching with --prune, the fetching process happens before pruning causing the branchname DF conflict to persist and report an error. This patch prunes before fetching, thus correcting DF conflicts during a

Re: [PATCH 3/3] fetch --prune: Repair branchname DF conflicts

2013-12-18 Thread Tom Miller
On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 3:54 PM, Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com wrote: Tom Miller jacker...@gmail.com writes: When a branchname DF conflict occurs during a fetch, You may have started with a specific case in which you want to change the behaviour of current Git, so it may be clear what you

Re: [PATCH 3/3] fetch --prune: Repair branchname DF conflicts

2013-12-18 Thread Junio C Hamano
Tom Miller jacker...@gmail.com writes: The commit below should be the same patch he tested. The test was added by him, and I made it part of this commit. Did I do this wrong? No, no, no. All my questions were true questions, not complaints veiled as rhetorical questions. Thanks for many