Re: VC mode and git

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Sergey Organov <address@hidden>
> Date: Wed, 01 Apr 2015 18:52:20 +0300
> 
> >> "Incorporates changes from the named commits (since the time their
> >> histories diverged from the current branch) into the current branch."
> >
> > Good luck understanding this when learning what merge does in Git!
> > Starting from the "branch" thingy, which, as you will read everywhere
> > is just a pointer to the HEAD commit.  So what does it mean to
> > "incorporate changes in the current branch", if the branch is just a
> > pointer?
> 
> Yes, a pointer that moves to point to new commit automatically every
> time you commit on the branch. Incorporating changes means the same
> thing every time: commit. What's new or unusual about it?

A merge does much more than just commit.  At least AFAIU.

> > And then there's "histories diverged" part, of course, that is never
> > explained.
> 
> Yeah it's total mystery to everybody. If one is so novice that she has
> no idea about "history diverged" thingy, she should really start from
> some basic tutorial, not from reading "git merge" manual page.

Please don't underestimate the difficulty of reading highly technical
text full of unexplained terminology.

> In this particular case he said utter lie

Whoa!  Slow down, nobody lies here.

> > Give up!  Git's documentation "needs work" (TM).  It's futile to try
> > to refute that.
> 
> Nobody refutes it. Any documentation needs work (TM). Git's needs work.
> It does not mean that spreading misinformation about its current state
> is acceptable.

Saying that documentation is inadequate isn't spreading
misinformation.