Re: [PATCH 1/2] merge-base: fix duplicates and not best ancestors in output

Hello, Junio! >> Hi there! >> First of all: I'm new to mailing-lists, sorry if I'm doing it wrong. >> >> I've found a bug in git merge-base, causing it to show not best common >> ancestors and duplicates under some circumstances (example is given in >> attached test case). > >Attached??? Sorry ab

Re: [PATCH 1/2] merge-base: fix duplicates and not best ancestors in output

Junio C Hamano writes: > I do not offhand remember if it was deliberate that we do not dedup > the result from the underlying get_octopus_merge_bases() (the most > likely reason for not deduping is because the caller is expected to > do that if it wants to). > > Whether it is an improvement to fo

Re: [PATCH 1/2] merge-base: fix duplicates and not best ancestors in output

Василий Макаров writes: > Hi there! > First of all: I'm new to mailing-lists, sorry if I'm doing it wrong. > > I've found a bug in git merge-base, causing it to show not best common > ancestors and duplicates under some circumstances (example is given in > attached test case). Attached??? > Pro

[PATCH 1/2] merge-base: fix duplicates and not best ancestors in output

Hi there! First of all: I'm new to mailing-lists, sorry if I'm doing it wrong. I've found a bug in git merge-base, causing it to show not best common ancestors and duplicates under some circumstances (example is given in attached test case). Problem cause is algorithm used in get_octopus_merge_bas