1 |
>>>>> "WH" == William Hubbs <williamh@g.o> writes: |
2 |
|
3 |
WH> My big complaint about merge commits is if you do a git show <hash> on |
4 |
WH> a merge commit, you get nothing, |
5 |
|
6 |
With current git and proper merge logs you get useful info. |
7 |
|
8 |
The headers contain the hashes, so you can get the list of |
9 |
commits pulled by that merge. |
10 |
|
11 |
The signed tag log is show. |
12 |
|
13 |
And merge conflicts also are shown. |
14 |
|
15 |
Based on the hashes in the Merge: header, you can use git log to see the |
16 |
individual commits or git diff to see the whole picture at once. |
17 |
|
18 |
Linus’ current tip is a good example: |
19 |
|
20 |
cd .../linux |
21 |
git show 1193755ac632 |
22 |
|
23 |
So, Gentoo shouldn't prohibit merges. Instead, it should demand that |
24 |
all merges be of signed tags. |
25 |
|
26 |
The plan includes signed commits anyway, so signed tags for pulls will be |
27 |
fully supported by any version of git which might be used. |
28 |
|
29 |
-JimC |
30 |
-- |
31 |
James Cloos <cloos@×××××××.com> OpenPGP: 1024D/ED7DAEA6 |