Re: git-rev-list bug?

Junio C Hamano [off-list ref] wrote:

Junio C Hamano [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

It however has a side effect -- uninteresting commits were never
parsed here, but now they get parsed.  I am not sure if there
are correctness implications...

Actually there is.  If a merge with an uninteresting side branch
was the only thing that brought changes to paths we are
interested in, we do not want TREE_SAME logic to remove other
parents (i.e. the branches we are interested in) from the merge
commit.  

So we would need a combination of both, something like this?

I can confirm that it "stg patches" works fine with this patch for
git-rev-list.

Thanks.

-- 
Catalin