Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] Check order when reading index

From: Junio C Hamano <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2014 10:43:21 -0700

Jaime Soriano Pastor <[email-masked]> writes:

> On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 6:53 PM, Junio C Hamano <[email-masked]> wrote:
>>
>> Yes---that is what I meant by the "virtual stuff".  Unlike resolve
>> work by Daniel (around Sep 2005 $gmane/8088) that tried to use
>> multiple ancestors directly in a single merge, recursive limits
>> itself to repeated use of pairwise merges.
>
> Ok, I see now. Then what about checking also in check_ce_order() that
> only stage #1 can be repeated?

We could use multiple stage #3 entries to natively represent an
octopus merge in progress if we wanted to.  I do not think we want
to close the door for doing so, unless there is some compelling
reason.

Does the current codebase choke with such entries in the index file,
like you saw in your index file with both stage #0 and stage #1
entries?