From: Stefan Sperling <stsp@stsp.name>
Subject: Re: [patch] simplify ancestry checks
To: James Cook <falsifian@falsifian.org>
Cc: gameoftrees@openbsd.org
Date: Thu, 25 May 2023 09:17:21 +0200

On Wed, May 24, 2023 at 10:28:24PM +0000, James Cook wrote:
> On Wed, May 24, 2023 at 05:58:20PM +0200, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> > And should it not say "if there is none" rather than "if there are none"?
> > I cannot think of a case where multiple YCA commits would exist. Unless
> > perhaps if merge-commits were excluded from the set of possible YCAs which
> > would leave their parent commits as a set of YCAs... ?
> > Maybe I am missing something?
>
> I meant "if there are no commits that can be reached from both commit_id
> and commit_id2".
>
> How about...
>
> /*
>  * Sets *yca_id to the youngest common ancestor of commit_id and
>  * commit_id2. Returns got_error(GOT_ERR_ANCESTRY) if they have no
>  * common ancestors.
>  *
>  * If first_parent_traversal is nonzero, only linear history is considered.
>  */

Thanks, this makes sense to me.
I have committed your diff with this new comment text swapped in.