Re: Cherry picking instead of merges.

[David Brown <git@davidb.org>]

On Thu, Jul 03, 2008 at 02:18:53PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:

>End result: you have a nice merge with nice history that actually 
>converges at a common point, but you effectively did the merge resolution 
>one commit at a time with cherry-picking (or "git rebase", which is 
>obviously just a convenient shorthand for cherry-picking everything).

I'm still not clear how the one-commit-at-a-time resolution gets recorded
anywhere (except in the cherry-picking branch).

It seems to be that I would need to do multiple merges, one at each point
where there is a conflict that I had to resolved.  I would remember this as
I did each cherry picked change, but after the fact, I would have to
compare the cherry picked change with the one it came from, and figure out
where conflicts had to be resolved.

Thanks,
David