[PATCH] Make fast forward merges more like normal merges.

[Nathan Jones]

On Wed, Jun 06, 2007 at 05:53:58PM -0700, Eric M. Hopper wrote:
> What are fast forward merges, and why were they created?

Fast forward merges came about from this thread:

http://www.selenic.com/pipermail/mercurial/2007-May/013113.html

On Wed, 2007-06-06 at 17:46 -0700, Brendan Cully wrote:
> On Wednesday, 06 June 2007 at 19:44, Nathan Jones wrote:
> > I have been using named branches and fast forward merges lately, but I
> > have found that fast forward merges work differently than normal merges:
> > 
> > 1. Parents are not listed.
> > 2. hg log -M displays fast forward merges.
> > 3. hg log -p does not display a diff like regular merges.
> 
> I don't have a super-strong opinion about it, but I'm not sure these
> are bad things. It seems like you're turning fast-forward merges back
> into plain old merges.

The way I see it, a fast forward merge is simply a name for the special
case of a merge when one branch is completely contained in the other
(from mercurial's viewpoint, there is only one head). I think fast
forward merges should be viewed exactly like a normal merge, at least
from the perspective of the end user.