From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Piotr Krukowiecki Subject: Re: "git rm" is not a valid merge resolution? Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2011 21:01:07 +0100 Message-ID: <4D87AE83.6080008@gmail.com> References: <4D879882.4070608@gmail.com> <7vvczcp8w7.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Git Mailing List To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon Mar 21 21:01:17 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Q1lHx-0005zX-EQ for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Mon, 21 Mar 2011 21:01:17 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754148Ab1CUUBN (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 Mar 2011 16:01:13 -0400 Received: from mail-bw0-f46.google.com ([209.85.214.46]:58018 "EHLO mail-bw0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752956Ab1CUUBM (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 Mar 2011 16:01:12 -0400 Received: by bwz15 with SMTP id 15so5320911bwz.19 for ; Mon, 21 Mar 2011 13:01:11 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to :cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=B1YKct7QJFPGEziJcAxknT5FN0FFQ3DjGuAboPZC8BU=; b=dwBG6PnJqopiG3RiIbOggjI7BwtKRRxg46Scojxd7wUtEuvcOWNH2eSo+MnwqQ8P9h dPWHhshR7G2Lw8fSxxoa5ZGm7DoBFp4BahRy2uNN/ulr9w9opiEoX1mbfANjh2CCGXXB l5srhNApa3PrmNO/FfhOzsfTNMfQy7Rv1itCo= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=wRQN4AAYvhWrFQ0z+VTgAC7LD/jzNfjvmBPvHnccRyC671jPZVlJ3dn9xjoWpCZb2i s1Ki++SntkyD/U4acW6SAw23jCkrc+v3t2AMO6JfSD8Ebf7nhbW4tSUjsiP2hELvy7MF n+WrUGNmsyJnXbBdH4mCcpRFrEUHV0roQcX7I= Received: by 10.204.141.17 with SMTP id k17mr4198558bku.41.1300737671072; Mon, 21 Mar 2011 13:01:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.101] (aadh98.neoplus.adsl.tpnet.pl [83.4.85.98]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id z18sm2245828bkf.8.2011.03.21.13.01.08 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Mon, 21 Mar 2011 13:01:08 -0700 (PDT) User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.2.14) Gecko/20110223 Thunderbird/3.1.8 In-Reply-To: <7vvczcp8w7.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: W dniu 21.03.2011 20:32, Junio C Hamano pisze: > Piotr Krukowiecki writes: > >> git-status shows a hint that says >> use "git add/rm ..." as appropriate to mark resolution >> >> But if I "git rm file" the file gets deleted. Is this really the >> appropriate merge resolution? >> >> I would expect "git rm" to maybe reset all the merge changes but >> it seems to just delete the file. > > Yes, if your side has a commit that updates a path since branches forked > (e.g. fixing a minor bug in an implementation of a function defined > there), and the other branch you are merging removed the path (e.g. fixing > a higher level callers and made that buggy function no longer necessary), > taking their removal can be a valid conflict resolution. Please see my other mail - file deletion can also be done by "git add". I feel that suggesting something that is wrong in most cases is wrong :) -- Piotr Krukowiecki