Re: [PATCH] doc: don't claim that cherry-pick calls patch-id
From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
Date: 2016-06-15 22:58:53
On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 03:14:09PM -0700, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:quoted
Subject: [PATCH] doc: don't claim that cherry-pick calls patch-ids/cherry-pick/cherry/quoted
The id is already different for binary files. Let's document that they are similar, not identical.Thanks. [...]quoted
--- a/Documentation/git-cherry.txt +++ b/Documentation/git-cherry.txt@@ -13,12 +13,13 @@ SYNOPSIS DESCRIPTION ----------- The changeset (or "diff") of each commit between the fork-point and <head> -is compared against each commit between the fork-point and <upstream>. +is compared against diff of each commit between the fork-point and <upstream>.I think the old version of this sentence is clearer.quoted
-The commits are compared with their 'patch id', obtained from -the 'git patch-id' program. +The diffs are compared with their diff id (sha1) calculated after removing +any whitespace and line numbers (similar but not necessarily identical +to 'patch id', obtained from the 'git patch-id' program).The hash used internally is just an implementation detail, so maybe this sentence could just be dropped?
I think the fact whitespace is ignored is relevant to users, no? We probably should drop talking about hash here.
quoted
Every commit that doesn't exist in the <upstream> branch -has its id (sha1) reported, prefixed by a symbol. The ones that have +has its diff id (sha1) reported, prefixed by a symbol. The ones that haveConfusingly, here 'id' means 'commit name'. For example: $ git log --oneline -1 sb/repack-in-c 0b63c6a repack: improve warnings about failure of renaming and removing files $ git cherry sb/repack-in-c^ sb/repack-in-c + 0b63c6a5b78f3fdd8c4e4fed4e535e7f4eed4257 Hope that helps, Jonathan