Re: VC mode and git

[Stephen J. Turnbull]

Harald Hanche-Olsen writes:
 > Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
 > > Eli Zaretskii writes:
 > >
 > >   >  What he did became clear, even to me, after he showed the information
 > >   >  we requested.
 > >
 > > It did?  It's not clear to me.  I still haven't seen an explanation of
 > > how he ended up with a ton of modified files that he didn't touch, or
 > > how he's going to get past that safely.
 > 
 > Then you must have been missing some messages. Short summary of such an 
 > explanation: They are the result of an incomplete merge operation, and 
 > all come from origin/master at the time of his pull. This may not be the 
 > *correct* explanation, but it is a *possible* explanation.

Yes, and I've posted three times mentioning those posts (by Eli as
well as you) and explaining the I have tried to reproduce this in a
toy repo and have been unable to.  It's no longer a possible
explanation that he pulled and these were left over *as far as I can
tell*.  I worry that it may matter in getting his repo fixed up
properly.

 > > Nobody has mentioned him doing a diff against a public reference
 > > commit that *should* be where he started, in order to confirm
 > > that when he pushes he can succeed (preferably without making the
 > > DAG too ugly, as well).
 > 
 > I have mentioned this.

You have my apologies then.  Make that "very few have mentioned this,
and not recently."  When I said nobody, I was mostly referring to the
recent spate of posts saying "fix, commit, pull, push should do it."

 > It is true that on this list, if not in the world at large, I am a
 > nobody, but you don't have to rub it in.

I assure you I have been taking your posts seriously.