Re: inexplicable failure to merge recursively across cherry-picks

martin f krafft [off-list ref] writes:

also sprach Linus Torvalds [off-list ref] [2007.10.10.0354 +0100]:

quoted

Cherry-picking is immaterial. It doesn't matter how the changes
come into the tree. It doesn't matter what the history is. The
only thing git cares about is the content, and the end result.

This is the part I over-estimated. I thought that Git would figure
out that commits 1-3 had been merged into the target and thus apply,
in sequence, only the commits from the source which had not been
merged.

Many thanks (again), Linus! Looking forward to your next content
manager; you know, the one with artificial intelligence built in!
You could call it "wit" :)

Well, there is also an obvious name choice when the distinguishing
innovation is a well-rounded feature set, but it would cause a name
collision for the equivalent of "tig".

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum