Re: Merging submodules - best merge-base

2013-03-10 Thread Heiko Voigt
On Sat, Mar 09, 2013 at 06:45:56PM +0100, Jens Lehmann wrote: > Am 07.03.2013 19:59, schrieb Heiko Voigt: > > On Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 10:49:09AM +0100, Daniel Bratell wrote: > >> Den 2013-03-06 19:12:05 skrev Heiko Voigt : > >>> So to summarize what you are requesting: You want a submodule merge be

Re: Merging submodules - best merge-base

2013-03-09 Thread Jens Lehmann
Am 07.03.2013 19:59, schrieb Heiko Voigt: > On Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 10:49:09AM +0100, Daniel Bratell wrote: >> Den 2013-03-06 19:12:05 skrev Heiko Voigt : >> >>> On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 05:44:05PM +0100, Daniel Bratell wrote: A submodule change can be merged, but only if the merge is a "f

Re: Merging submodules - best merge-base

2013-03-07 Thread Heiko Voigt
On Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 10:49:09AM +0100, Daniel Bratell wrote: > Den 2013-03-06 19:12:05 skrev Heiko Voigt : > > >On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 05:44:05PM +0100, Daniel Bratell wrote: > >>A submodule change can be merged, but only if the merge is a > >>"fast-forward" which I think is a fair demand, but

Re: Merging submodules - best merge-base

2013-03-07 Thread Daniel Bratell
Den 2013-03-06 19:12:05 skrev Heiko Voigt : On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 05:44:05PM +0100, Daniel Bratell wrote: I can phrase this in two ways and I'll start with the short way: Why does a merge of a git submodule use as merge-base the commit that was active in the merge-base of the parent repo,

Re: Merging submodules - best merge-base

2013-03-06 Thread Heiko Voigt
On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 05:44:05PM +0100, Daniel Bratell wrote: > I can phrase this in two ways and I'll start with the short way: > > Why does a merge of a git submodule use as merge-base the commit that was > active in the merge-base of the parent repo, rather than the merge-base of > the tw