Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobox.com> writes: > sorga...@gmail.com writes:
[...] >> @@ -138,14 +133,15 @@ will exit early with the message "Already up-to-date." >> FAST-FORWARD MERGE >> ------------------ >> >> -Often the current branch head is an ancestor of the named commit. >> +Often the current branch head is an ancestor of the named commit. In >> +this case, a new commit is not needed to store the combined history; >> +instead, the `HEAD` (along with the index) is updated to point at the >> +named commit, without creating an extra merge commit. >> + >> This is the most common case especially when invoked from 'git >> pull': you are tracking an upstream repository, you have committed >> no local changes, and now you want to update to a newer upstream >> -revision. In this case, a new commit is not needed to store the >> -combined history; instead, the `HEAD` (along with the index) is >> -updated to point at the named commit, without creating an extra >> -merge commit. >> +revision. > > I am not sure if the post-image of this hunk is better than the > original. That's what I've tried to explain in the description of the patch: "No awareness of git-pull is required to understand git-merge operation, so leave reference to git-pull only where it actually makes sense, in the description of fast-forward merges, and only as clarification of when this merging behaviour is mostly useful." So I believe this change is inline with the rest of the patch. The reference to git-pull (if it remains) should be a side-note, not part of explanation of operation. -- Sergey
