| Name |
Last commit
|
Last update |
|---|---|---|
| .. | ||
| analysis.c | ||
| dirty.c | ||
| recursive.c | ||
| renames.c | ||
| setup.c | ||
| simple.c | ||
| submodules.c | ||
| trivial.c |
When the commits being merged have multiple merge bases, reverse the order when creating the virtual merge base. This is for compatibility with git's merge-recursive algorithm, and ensures that we build identical trees. Git does this to try to use older merge bases first. Per 8918b0c: > It seems to be the only sane way to do it: when a two-head merge is > done, and the merge-base and one of the two branches agree, the > merge assumes that the other branch has something new. > > If we start creating virtual commits from newer merge-bases, and go > back to older merge-bases, and then merge with newer commits again, > chances are that a patch is lost, _because_ the merge-base and the > head agree on it. Unlikely, yes, but it happened to me.
| Name |
Last commit
|
Last update |
|---|---|---|
| .. | ||
| analysis.c | Loading commit data... | |
| dirty.c | Loading commit data... | |
| recursive.c | Loading commit data... | |
| renames.c | Loading commit data... | |
| setup.c | Loading commit data... | |
| simple.c | Loading commit data... | |
| submodules.c | Loading commit data... | |
| trivial.c | Loading commit data... |