Re: Missing changes in merges from emacs-25 to master

[David Engster]

Eli Zaretskii writes:
>> From: David Engster <address@hidden>
>> Cc: John Wiegley <address@hidden>,  address@hidden
>> Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2016 10:15:41 +0100
>
>> 
>> Eli Zaretskii writes:
>> > There seems to be another issue with merging to master: we get back
>> > commits that were cherry-picked from master to the release branch.
>> 
>> When you merge a branch, you have to merge all of it. But when they are
>> marked as 'skipped', they will be merged with strategy "ours",
>> effectively ignoring their content.
>
> What does "their content" include, exactly?

The patch.

The merge-strategy "ours" means: merge the commit, but take "our"
version of everything that would be changed by it. The commit is seen as
merged afterwards, but without applying the patch it includes.

>> This is how it worked with Bazaar as well.
>
> With Bazaar, there was a clear mainline, displaying which these
> commits wouldn't appear at all. We don't have that with Git, so the
> analogy doesn't really help.

Bazaar didn't display *any* commits from merged branches by default,
whether they were "skipped" or not. So again: gitmerge does that same as
bzrmerge did. That we don't invest the effort to keep our mainline on
the "left side" is another matter.

-David