On Mon, Jul 9, 2018 at 1:22 PM, Elijah Newren <new...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Jul 9, 2018 at 10:53 AM, Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobox.com> wrote: >> Elijah Newren <new...@gmail.com> writes: >> >>> When a merge succeeds, we expect the resulting contents to depend only >>> upon the trees and blobs of the branches involved and of their merge >>> base(s). Unfortunately, there are currently about half a dozen cases >>> where the contents of a "successful" merge depend on the relative >>> commit timestamps of the merge bases. Document these with testcases. >>> >>> (This series came out of looking at modifying how file collision >>> conflict types are handled, as discussed at [1]. I discovered these >>> issues while working on that topic.) >> >> I have a topic branch for this series but not merged to 'pu' as >> test-lint gives these: >> ... > > ... here's a fixup to the topic; as you pointed out, the exact contents > of the script being written were actually irrelevant; it was just an > input to a merge. > > -- 8< -- > Subject: [PATCH] fixup! t6036: add a failed conflict detection case: regular > files, different modes >
Does a 'fixup!' commit require a Signed-off-by? Just realized that this one didn't have it, though I don't know if it's necessary. If it is: Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <new...@gmail.com>
