W dniu 2014-06-20 23:17, Nico Williams pisze:
On Fri, Jun 20, 2014 at 1:53 AM, Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com wrote:
Michael Haggerty mhag...@alum.mit.edu writes:
[...]
Hmph, but that obviously will become very expensive to compute as
project grows.
That's the main reason to like
Michael Haggerty mhag...@alum.mit.edu writes:
It just looks asymmetric, but actually it is symmetric, which was kindof
surprising when I realized it
Since |branch ∧ master| is the same for all candidates, minimizing N
is the same as maximizing |candidate|, which is the same as
git
On 06/20/2014 08:53 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Michael Haggerty mhag...@alum.mit.edu writes:
It just looks asymmetric, but actually it is symmetric, which was kindof
surprising when I realized it
Since |branch ∧ master| is the same for all candidates, minimizing N
is the same as
On Fri, Jun 20, 2014 at 1:53 AM, Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com wrote:
Michael Haggerty mhag...@alum.mit.edu writes:
[...]
Hmph, but that obviously will become very expensive to compute as
project grows.
That's the main reason to like Fossil's approach (namely, the use of
SQL, specifically
Michael Haggerty mhag...@alum.mit.edu writes:
The best merge base
=
But not all merge bases are created equal. It is possible to define a
best merge base that has some nice properties.
Let's focus on the command
git diff $master...$branch
which is equivalent to
On 06/17/2014 05:08 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Michael Haggerty mhag...@alum.mit.edu writes:
The best merge base
=
But not all merge bases are created equal. It is possible to define a
best merge base that has some nice properties.
Let's focus on the command
git
Michael Haggerty venit, vidit, dixit 13.06.2014 00:12:
I've been thinking a lot about merge bases lately and think I have
discovered something interesting.
tl;dr:
When two branches have multiple merge bases,
git merge-base $master $branch
picks one merge base more or less
On 06/13/2014 11:38 AM, Michael J Gruber wrote:
Michael Haggerty venit, vidit, dixit 13.06.2014 00:12:
I've been thinking a lot about merge bases lately and think I have
discovered something interesting.
tl;dr:
When two branches have multiple merge bases,
git merge-base $master
W dniu 2014-06-13 11:38, Michael J Gruber pisze:
Michael Haggerty venit, vidit, dixit 13.06.2014 00:12:
I've been thinking a lot about merge bases lately and think I have
discovered something interesting.
tl;dr:
When two branches have multiple merge bases,
git merge-base $master $branch
On 06/13/2014 05:52 PM, Jakub Narębski wrote:
I don't know if it has been fixed, but there is a difference
between git diff A...B when A and B have one merge base, and
git diff A...B when there are more than one merge base.
When there is one merge base, git diff A...B returns simple
unified
Jakub Narębski jna...@gmail.com writes:
I don't know if it has been fixed, but there is a difference
between git diff A...B when A and B have one merge base, and
git diff A...B when there are more than one merge base.
When there is one merge base, git diff A...B returns simple
unified diff
I've been thinking a lot about merge bases lately and think I have
discovered something interesting.
tl;dr:
When two branches have multiple merge bases,
git merge-base $master $branch
picks one merge base more or less arbitrarily. Here I describe a
criterion for picking a best merge base.
12 matches
Mail list logo
