Re: [PATCH] Document what the stage numbers in the :$n:path syntax mean.

["Shawn O. Pearce" <spearce@spearce.org>]

"Shawn O. Pearce" <spearce@spearce.org> wrote:
> Jeff King <peff@peff.net> wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 20, 2007 at 11:36:38AM +0800, Steven Grimm wrote:
> > 
> > > The git-rev-parse manpage talks about the :$n:path notation (buried deep in
> > > a list of other syntax) but it just says $n is a "stage number" -- someone
> > > who is not familiar with the internals of git's merge implementation is
> > > never going to be able to figure out that "1", "2", and "3" mean what Junio
> > > said.
> > 
> > I often forget which number corresponds to which source. I seem to
> > recall somebody proposing :ours:$path a while ago, but I couldn't find
> > any reference in the archive, so perhaps I just dreamed it.
> > 
> > Am I the only one who messes this up? If not, patch is below.
> 
> Maybe.  ;-)
> 
> I've memorized it long long ago.  But my coworkers haven't and always
> get it wrong, and look at me funny when I tell them "trust me, your
> data is in stage 2 and theirs is in stage 3...  because that's the
> convention all of the tools you are using follows".

Actually, what's wrong with the following:

	git show HEAD:foo.c
	git show MERGE_HEAD:foo.c

?

That gives you yours (HEAD) and theirs (MERGE_HEAD).  And it doesn't
abuse sha1_file.c.  Granted it only works during a true merge and
doesn't work during a rebase, but remember I just pointed out life
is backwards anyway during a rebase, so uh, yea...

-- 
Shawn.