Xue Fuqiao <xfq.f...@gmail.com> writes: > Hi Junio, > > On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 4:22 AM, Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobox.com> wrote: > >> Yeah, that is the other way around. >> >> (1) If the current branch is a descendant of the other--so every >> commit present in the other branch is already contained in the >> current branch--then merging the other branch into the current >> branch is a no-op "Already up-to-date!". >> >> (2) If the current branch is an ancestor of the other--so every >> commit present in the current branch is already contained in >> the other branch--then merging the other branch into the >> current branch can be fast-forwarded, by moving the tip of the >> current branch to point at the commit at the tip of the other >> branch, and by default Git does so, instead of creating an >> unnecessary merge. > > I see. Thank you. What do you think about the following minor patch > for user-manual.txt?
While the updated text is more correct than the original, I do not know if that is sufficient, or we would also want to mention the "Already up-to-date!" case here while at it. > -However, if the current branch is a descendant of the other--so every > -commit present in the one is already contained in the other--then Git > -just performs a "fast-forward"; the head of the current branch is moved > -forward to point at the head of the merged-in branch, without any new > -commits being created. > +However, if the current branch is an ancestor of the other--so every commit > +present in the current branch is already contained in the other > branch--then Git > +just performs a "fast-forward"; the head of the current branch is moved > forward > +to point at the head of the merged-in branch, without any new commits being > +created. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
