Re: [PATCH] Documentation/git-merge.txt: Expand the How Merge Works section

[Petr Baudis <pasky@suse.cz>]

  Hi,

On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 12:34:31PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Petr Baudis <pasky@suse.cz> writes:
> 
> >   I'm not sure if I should resend the updated patch, or if you already
> > included your comments yourself.
> 
> When I send my review comments out, I generally expect an updated version,
> unless I explicitly say "will apply with tweaks, no need to resend".

  ok, that is pretty much what I expected, I just wanted to avoid doing
duplicate work. :-)

..snip..
> yes, I am strongly hinting to drop that description; it
> is not even remotely interesting

  I have tried to salvage the now-subsection for a while yet, but
ultimately, I now feel as well that it is not worth it; the meat of it
can be summed up in a single sentence that I have re-added to the main
section.

> However, I think we may want to talk about "How to tell if your merge did
> not even touch your index nor working tree" somewhere in the manual.
> "When there are conflicts, these things happen" part talks about how to
> resolve conflicts, but when merge refuses to avoid losing local changes,
> the instruction in that part does not apply.

  I'm not sure if this is worth pondering about? The action would feel
rather obvious to me - get rid of the local changes somehow, either
committing them or stashing them or wiping them out. Is that worth
elaborating, or is there more to it?

-- 
				Petr "Pasky" Baudis
GNU, n. An animal of South Africa, which in its domesticated state
resembles a horse, a buffalo and a stag. In its wild condition it is
something like a thunderbolt, an earthquake and a cyclone. -- A. Pierce