Re: VC mode and git

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Sergey Organov <address@hidden>
> Date: Thu, 02 Apr 2015 15:27:18 +0300
> 
> Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> writes:
> >> From: Sergey Organov <address@hidden>
> >> Date: Wed, 01 Apr 2015 18:52:20 +0300
> >> 
> >> >> "Incorporates changes from the named commits (since the time their
> >> >> histories diverged from the current branch) into the current branch."
> >> >
> >> > Good luck understanding this when learning what merge does in Git!
> >> > Starting from the "branch" thingy, which, as you will read everywhere
> >> > is just a pointer to the HEAD commit.  So what does it mean to
> >> > "incorporate changes in the current branch", if the branch is just a
> >> > pointer?
> >> 
> >> Yes, a pointer that moves to point to new commit automatically every
> >> time you commit on the branch. Incorporating changes means the same
> >> thing every time: commit. What's new or unusual about it?
> >
> > A merge does much more than just commit.  At least AFAIU.
> 
> Dunno what you have in mind.

The changes to meta-data that reflect the changes in the history DAG.

> > Saying that documentation is inadequate isn't spreading
> > misinformation.
> 
> Please re-read what I complained about. Here is what Alan said about git
> merge manual page:
> 
> "... it doesn't even say where the two sources for its merge come from,
> or where it puts the result."
> 
> "Part of the problem is that the git-merge man page doesn't say that it
> messes with the working tree."

I understood that as meaning the information was not clear enough.