From: Matt McCutchen <matt@mattmccutchen.net>
To: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Cc: Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>,
git <git@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Is XDL_MERGE_ZEALOUS too zealous (or maybe not zealous enough)?
Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2008 23:42:00 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1224474120.19785.3.camel@mattlaptop2.local> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7v3ais5hb3.fsf_-_@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org>
On Sun, 2008-10-19 at 15:52 -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> However, the usual simplified merge shows this (run "git checkout --merge
> builtin-checkout.c" if you have done the above):
>
> <<<<<<< ours
> /* --track without -b should DWIM */
> if (0 < opts.track && !opts.new_branch) {
> const char *argv0 = argv[0];
> ...
> opts.new_branch = argv0 + 1;
> }
>
> if (opts.track == BRANCH_TRACK_UNSPECIFIED)
> opts.track = git_branch_track;
> =======
> if (conflict_style) {
> opts.merge = 1; /* implied */
> git_xmerge_config("merge.conflictstyle", conflict_style, NULL);
> }
>
> if (!opts.new_branch && (opts.track != git_branch_track))
> die("git checkout: --track and --no-track require -b");
> >>>>>>> theirs
>
> Removing the two lines from the simplified "theirs" is not what I would
> suggest (it would be actively wrong), but I wonder if we can do something
> clever to help users with a merge like this.
IMHO, the solution is just to use diff3 style. I never understood how I
was supposed to intuit the correct result of a merge from the two sides
without seeing the common ancestor, so I am glad to have the diff3 style
working now.
Matt
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-10-20 3:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-10-19 0:54 "git checkout: --track and --no-track require -b" check accidentally resurrected? Matt McCutchen
2008-10-19 22:15 ` Junio C Hamano
2008-10-19 22:52 ` Is XDL_MERGE_ZEALOUS too zealous (or maybe not zealous enough)? Junio C Hamano
2008-10-20 3:42 ` Matt McCutchen [this message]
2008-10-20 16:17 ` Johannes Schindelin
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=1224474120.19785.3.camel@mattlaptop2.local \
--to=matt@mattmccutchen.net \
--cc=Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).