Re: Linux 2.6.12-rc3

From: Pavel Machek
Date: Sun Apr 24 2005 - 02:27:52 EST


On Ne 24-04-05 01:23:03, Petr Baudis wrote:
> Dear diary, on Sat, Apr 23, 2005 at 01:18:39AM CEST, I got a letter
> where Pavel Machek <pavel@xxxxxx> told me that...
> > git patch origin:
> >
> > will list my patches, plus any merges I done... Is there any
> > reasonable way to get only "my" changes? When I do not have to resolve
> > anything during merge, it should be usable... but that is starting to
> > look ugly.
> I told you the semantics is peculiar.
> We could add a flag to rev-tree to always follow only the first parent;
> that would be useful even for a flag for git log to "flatten" the
> history, if you aren't interested in what was going on in the trees you
> just merged.
> Another flag to avoid showing patches for merges might be possible, but
> actually a little scary since you don't have consistency assured that
> way; your post-merge patches might generate rejects when applied on top
> of the pre-merge patches, or your pre-merge patches might not apply
> cleanly on the tree you merged with.
> So if you want to ignore merges, it sounds that you are probably
> actually doing something wrong. We might still let you do it
> assuming

Right. Actually right thing might be to "only show human-made part of
each merge" or something like that. Ignoring merges altogether is not
quite right. OTOH really only small part of merge is going to
Boycott Kodak -- for their patent abuse against Java.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at