Re: [PATCH v2 8/8] revision.c: discount UNINTERESTING parents

2013-05-04 Thread Kevin Bracey
On 02/05/2013 23:05, Junio C Hamano wrote: > >>> Z...A===X---o---o---B >>>\\/ >>> W---Y >>> > OK, I think I understand it, and we are in agreement. For the > purpose of the above paragraph, a side branch is what is not on the > "--ancestry-path", so all of the

Re: [PATCH v2 8/8] revision.c: discount UNINTERESTING parents

2013-05-02 Thread Junio C Hamano
Kevin Bracey writes: > On 01/05/2013 00:18, Junio C Hamano wrote: > >>> These rules paying more attention to UNINTERESTING do add a tricky >>> wrinkle to behaviour. Because limited revision lists are conventionally >>> expressed as A..B (ie B ^A), the bottom commit is UNINTERESTING. >> OK. >> >>>

Re: [PATCH v2 8/8] revision.c: discount UNINTERESTING parents

2013-05-02 Thread Kevin Bracey
On 01/05/2013 00:18, Junio C Hamano wrote: These rules paying more attention to UNINTERESTING do add a tricky wrinkle to behaviour. Because limited revision lists are conventionally expressed as A..B (ie B ^A), the bottom commit is UNINTERESTING. OK. Thus its connection to the INTERESTING gra

Re: [PATCH v2 8/8] revision.c: discount UNINTERESTING parents

2013-04-30 Thread Junio C Hamano
Kevin Bracey writes: > The simplification and rewriting logic previously paid little heed to > whether parents were UNINTERESTING, leading to situations where limited > histories could unnecessarily include a lot of irrelevant merges along > the boundary. Tighten up the rules to properly account

[PATCH v2 8/8] revision.c: discount UNINTERESTING parents

2013-04-30 Thread Kevin Bracey
The simplification and rewriting logic previously paid little heed to whether parents were UNINTERESTING, leading to situations where limited histories could unnecessarily include a lot of irrelevant merges along the boundary. Tighten up the rules to properly account for limited lists: 1) If a mer