Re: who's on first? - following first parent and merge-management

Jonathan Nieder [off-list ref] writes:

Junio C Hamano wrote:

quoted

Given the above definition, the first thing to realize is that "the
first parent" is primarily a local concept.

[... and much nice explanation ...]

Would you mind including this explanation as a new file with some name
like <Documentation/howto/using-first-parent.txt>?  I think the quoted
explanation is very clear and I have not come up with any obvious
tweaks to make to it, which is why I am simply suggesting this instead
of sending a patch that would repeat the same text.

Strawman abstract:

| From: Junio C Hamano [off-list ref]
| Date: Wed, 07 Mar 2012 22:13:46 -0800
| Subject: who's on first? - following first parent and merge-management
| Abstract: In this article, JC describes the "log --first-parent" and
|  "merge --no-ff" options and what kind of history makes them useful.

Everything I write here is open source, so in that sense I wouldn't
mind, but I have a suspicion that building on existing gitworkflows
document might be more appropriate, as opposed to a self-contained
standalone document that has to be read by readers in addition to
the other existing documents.  The current gitworkflows document is
detailed in describing how the history is built, but is fairly
lacking in description on how the resulting history can be studied.