> way less inconvenient when it does happen (because merging forked branches is a perfectly normal operation and it doesn't really matter how much the branches have diverged).
Why is two branches that diverge after the initial readme commit so much easier than two branches that diverge from the start? Why doesn't it just treat it the same way (as if the empty repo state was a commit that's the merge base)?
> It completely fuck up diff views of the merge commit.
Same question as above - why is the diff so different in that case?
Why is two branches that diverge after the initial readme commit so much easier than two branches that diverge from the start? Why doesn't it just treat it the same way (as if the empty repo state was a commit that's the merge base)?
> It completely fuck up diff views of the merge commit.
Same question as above - why is the diff so different in that case?