Re: VC mode and git

[Sergey Organov]

Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> writes:

>> From: Sergey Organov <address@hidden>
>> Date: Sat, 04 Apr 2015 00:40:58 +0300
>> 
>> Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> writes:
>> 
>> > It's for Alan to say if it's more helpful than saying that a merge is
>> > "just a commit".
>> 
>> You are putting words into (my?) mouth. Nobody ever said that merge, the
>> operation, is just a commit, AFAIR. If you indeed meant me, that's what
>> I said:
>> 
>>      After true merge operation is finished, the only result of it is
>>      single commit appended to your current branch. Git /is/ that
>>      simple. All the possible complexity is in the stage of content
>>      preparation for this commit.
>> 
>> I fail to see how this could be taken as saying that merge is just a
>> commit. What I wanted to tell /you/, not /Alan/, is that there is no any
>> hidden meta-information or other mysteries involved.
>
> It was a long sub-thread, so I can understand how you could forget
> what started it.  Let me remind you:

I didn't forget it. Thanks for reminding anyway.

>
> You:
>
>> >> "Incorporates changes from the named commits (since the time their
>> >> histories diverged from the current branch) into the current branch."
>
> Me:
>
>> > 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?
>
> You:
>
>> 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?
>
> Which I interpreted as you saying that a merge "means" ("is") "just a
> commit", like every other commit.

I tried to answer to the essence of your question to the best of my
knowledge of Git, just to later receive a blame in being only 90%
precise and in confusing people by saying that "merge is just commit",
that I never said.

I see I made a mistake trying to explain "git merge" manual to you,
thinking that I can do it better than the manual itself. I can't.

-- Sergey.