Re: [PATCH 0/7] [doc] Add new page on merge conflicts

["Julia Evans" <julia@jvns.ca>]

On Fri, Oct 2, 2026, at 10:29 PM, D. Ben Knoble wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 2, 2026 at 1:40 PM Julia Evans <julia@jvns.ca> wrote:
>>
>> Thanks for the review!
>>
>> >>  * I wrote that git commit does the same thing as git merge --continue
>> >>    during a git merge , but I'm not sure if that's always true.
>> >
>> > See also discussion in
>> > https://lore.kernel.org/git/CABPp-BEQSx4m3BcT28CpVGCtsH75+x3gmv4OJz_ecLVLx+kBWg@mail.gmail.com/T/#t
>>
>> Wow, that's a very interesting read. I'm more informed than I was before
>> I read it but also at the same time more confused :). It makes me think
>> that "git commit does the same thing as git merge --continue" is maybe
>> not true but also I don't know what the difference might be.
>>
>> I've put an item on my TODO list to remove
>> `git commit does the same thing as git merge --continue`" and to try to
>> replace it with a more vague sentence that I guess says you can use
>> either command without being so specific on whether they are exactly
>> the same.
>
> For now I would say the subtleties in that conversation really make me
> lean towards the following:
>
> - "git <thing> --continue" is, for most users in most cases, the right
> thing to do. It's what "git status" recommends and will practically
> never do anything surprising (?).

I was actually surprised to discover that `git status` does not recommend
`git merge --continue`: it recommends `git commit`.
Maybe we should change that though?

I agree it makes sense to be consistent with what `git status` recommends.

> - However, it may not always be exactly what you *want*---and you'll
> usually know when you want to go "outside" the normal sequencer and
> commit directly (because you'll have understood some nuanced details
> about what can happen).
>
> For merge it may be the case that they're the same, I suppose (I'm
> genuinely not sure), but I would prefer to simplify folks' paths by
> recommending one of the few uniform interfaces we have :)

The only other thing that gives me pause about recommending folks
`git merge --continue` too strongly is that as we know Git users are slow to
change their habits, and we don't want to confuse anyone. If someone is
currently using `git commit` I want to know that they can keep doing
it the same way with no worries.

Maybe if we change `git status` to recommend `git merge --continue`,
and we think there are no real advantages to using `git commit` instead
of `git merge --continue`, then we could say something like this:

  NOTE: `git commit` is an older alternative to `git merge --continue`.
  You can use either one after resolving a `git merge`.