All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "SZEDER Gábor" <szeder@ira.uka.de>
To: git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: How to automatically correct an almost correct auto-merge?
Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2011 21:32:15 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20111216203215.GG1868@goldbirke> (raw)

Hi,


Briefly:

Neighboring areas of a file are modified in two branches.  Git merges
the two branches without conflicts, but the result is not semantically
correct.  How can I teach git to produce the correct merge result when
performing the same merge later on?


Longer:

The following commands create a file and two branches, both of them
modifying the file by adding lines in the same area:

git init
cat >file <<\EOF
1

2
EOF
git add file
git commit -m file
git apply <<\EOF
diff --git a/file b/file
index 1c3e7efc..121366a2 100644
--- a/file
+++ b/file
@@ -1,3 +1,5 @@
 1

+a
+
 2
EOF
git commit -a -m a
git checkout -b branch HEAD^
git apply <<\EOF
diff --git a/file b/file
index 1c3e7efc..f2e91d4f 100644
--- a/file
+++ b/file
@@ -1,3 +1,6 @@
 1
+b
+
+c

 2
EOF
git commit -a -m 'b c'
git checkout master


At this point I merge 'branch' and git produces the following result:

$ git merge branch
Auto-merging file
Merge made by the 'recursive' strategy.
 file |    3 +++
 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
$ cat file
1
b

c

a

2


Now, these changes and the merge above are the minimal receipe which
corresponds to a real merge I'm having trouble with at dayjob.  Just
imagine that '1' and '2' are the beginning and end of a function, 'b'
is the declaration of a new local variable, and 'a' and 'c' are new
code blocks.  As it happens, the semantically correct result would be
the following:

1
b

a

c

2

i.e. 'a' must be executed before 'c'.

I corrected the merge result manually, but these two branches are
merged a couple of times a day into an integration branch, and they
will likely cook for a few weeks, which means a lot of merges, and a
lot of manual corrections.  So I'm looking for a way to teach git to
produce the semantically correct merge result.  Something like
'rerere' would be great, but of course I can't use 'rerere' in this
case, because there are no merge conflicts at all...

Any ideas?  Did someone deal with similar issues before?


Thanks,
Gábor

             reply	other threads:[~2011-12-16 20:32 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-12-16 20:32 SZEDER Gábor [this message]
2011-12-16 20:39 ` How to automatically correct an almost correct auto-merge? Seth Robertson
2011-12-17 11:07   ` SZEDER Gábor
2011-12-16 21:32 ` Neal Kreitzinger

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20111216203215.GG1868@goldbirke \
    --to=szeder@ira.uka.de \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.