From: Phillip Wood <phillip.wood123@gmail.com>
To: Izzy via GitGitGadget <gitgitgadget@gmail.com>, git@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>, Jeff King <peff@peff.net>,
Izzy <winglovet@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] merge-tree: add -X strategy option
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2023 10:53:48 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <67638fd7-ad63-4e20-87e1-bef121fef197@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <pull.1565.v5.git.1694853437494.gitgitgadget@gmail.com>
On 16/09/2023 09:37, Izzy via GitGitGadget wrote:
> From: Tang Yuyi <winglovet@gmail.com>
>
> Add merge strategy option to produce more customizable merge result such
> as automatically resolving conflicts.
I think adding a merge strategy option to merge-tree is a good idea, but
have you tested this with anything apart from -Xours or -Xtheirs? It
looks to me like those are the only two that this patch supports. If you
look at parse_merge_opt() in merge-recursive.c you will see that there
are many other options. In order to support all the merge options I
think this patch needs a bit of refactoring.
> diff --git a/builtin/merge-tree.c b/builtin/merge-tree.c
> index 0de42aecf4b..97d0fe6c952 100644
> --- a/builtin/merge-tree.c
> +++ b/builtin/merge-tree.c
> static int real_merge(struct merge_tree_options *o,
> @@ -439,6 +441,8 @@ static int real_merge(struct merge_tree_options *o,
>
> init_merge_options(&opt, the_repository);
>
> + opt.recursive_variant = o->merge_options.recursive_variant;
> +
Rather that copying across individual members I think you should
initialize o->merge_options properly in cmd_merge_tree() by calling
init_merge_options() and then use o->merge_options instead of "opt" in
this function. That way all the strategy options will be supported.
> opt.show_rename_progress = 0;
>
> opt.branch1 = branch1;
> @@ -513,6 +517,7 @@ static int real_merge(struct merge_tree_options *o,
> int cmd_merge_tree(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix)
> {
> struct merge_tree_options o = { .show_messages = -1 };
> + struct strvec xopts = STRVEC_INIT;
> int expected_remaining_argc;
> int original_argc;
> const char *merge_base = NULL;
> @@ -548,6 +553,8 @@ int cmd_merge_tree(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix)
> &merge_base,
> N_("commit"),
> N_("specify a merge-base for the merge")),
> + OPT_STRVEC('X', "strategy-option", &xopts, N_("option=value"),
> + N_("option for selected merge strategy")),
> OPT_END()
> };
>
> @@ -556,6 +563,10 @@ int cmd_merge_tree(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix)
You should add
init_merge_options(&o.merge_options);
here to ensure it is properly initialized.
> argc = parse_options(argc, argv, prefix, mt_options,
> merge_tree_usage, PARSE_OPT_STOP_AT_NON_OPTION);
This is the right place to call parse_merge_opt() but I think we should
first check that the user has requested a real merge rather than a
trivial merge.
if (xopts.nr && o.mode == MODE_TRIVIAL)
die(_("--trivial-merge is incompatible with all other options"));
Otherwise if the user passes in invalid strategy option to a trivial
merge they'll get an error about an invalid strategy option rather than
being told --strategy-option is not supported with --trivial-merge.
Ideally there would be a preparatory patch that moves the switch
statement that is below the "if(o.use_stdin)" block up to this point so
we'd always have set o.mode before checking if it is a trivial merge. (I
think you'd to change the code slightly when it is moved to add a check
for o.use_stdin)
Best Wishes
Phillip
> + for (int x = 0; x < xopts.nr; x++)
> + if (parse_merge_opt(&o.merge_options, xopts.v[x]))
> + die(_("unknown strategy option: -X%s"), xopts.v[x]);
> +
> /* Handle --stdin */
> if (o.use_stdin) {
> struct strbuf buf = STRBUF_INIT;
> diff --git a/t/t4301-merge-tree-write-tree.sh b/t/t4301-merge-tree-write-tree.sh
> index 250f721795b..b2c8a43fce3 100755
> --- a/t/t4301-merge-tree-write-tree.sh
> +++ b/t/t4301-merge-tree-write-tree.sh
> @@ -22,6 +22,7 @@ test_expect_success setup '
> git branch side1 &&
> git branch side2 &&
> git branch side3 &&
> + git branch side4 &&
>
> git checkout side1 &&
> test_write_lines 1 2 3 4 5 6 >numbers &&
> @@ -46,6 +47,13 @@ test_expect_success setup '
> test_tick &&
> git commit -m rename-numbers &&
>
> + git checkout side4 &&
> + test_write_lines 0 1 2 3 4 5 >numbers &&
> + echo yo >greeting &&
> + git add numbers greeting &&
> + test_tick &&
> + git commit -m other-content-modifications &&
> +
> git switch --orphan unrelated &&
> >something-else &&
> git add something-else &&
> @@ -97,6 +105,21 @@ test_expect_success 'Content merge and a few conflicts' '
> test_cmp expect actual
> '
>
> +test_expect_success 'Auto resolve conflicts by "ours" strategy option' '
> + git checkout side1^0 &&
> +
> + # make sure merge conflict exists
> + test_must_fail git merge side4 &&
> + git merge --abort &&
> +
> + git merge -X ours side4 &&
> + git rev-parse HEAD^{tree} >expected &&
> +
> + git merge-tree -X ours side1 side4 >actual &&
> +
> + test_cmp expected actual
> +'
> +
> test_expect_success 'Barf on misspelled option, with exit code other than 0 or 1' '
> # Mis-spell with single "s" instead of double "s"
> test_expect_code 129 git merge-tree --write-tree --mesages FOOBAR side1 side2 2>expect &&
>
> base-commit: ac83bc5054c2ac489166072334b4147ce6d0fccb
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-09-18 9:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-08-05 14:24 [PATCH] merge-tree: add -X strategy option Izzy via GitGitGadget
2023-08-07 2:10 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-08-12 5:33 ` [PATCH v2] " Izzy via GitGitGadget
2023-08-12 5:41 ` 唐宇奕
2023-09-03 1:31 ` 唐宇奕
2023-09-12 15:03 ` Elijah Newren
2023-09-16 2:14 ` [PATCH v3] " Izzy via GitGitGadget
2023-09-16 2:26 ` 唐宇奕
2023-09-16 3:21 ` Elijah Newren
2023-09-16 3:16 ` Elijah Newren
2023-09-16 3:47 ` [PATCH v4] " Izzy via GitGitGadget
2023-09-16 3:55 ` Elijah Newren
2023-09-16 4:04 ` 唐宇奕
2023-09-16 6:11 ` Jeff King
2023-09-16 8:37 ` [PATCH v5] " Izzy via GitGitGadget
2023-09-16 8:38 ` 唐宇奕
2023-09-18 9:53 ` Phillip Wood [this message]
2023-09-18 16:08 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-09-24 2:23 ` [PATCH v6] " Izzy via GitGitGadget
2023-09-24 2:26 ` 唐宇奕
2023-10-09 9:58 ` Phillip Wood
2023-10-09 15:53 ` Jeff King
2023-10-09 17:10 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-10-09 18:52 ` Jeff King
2023-10-11 19:38 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-10-11 21:43 ` Jeff King
2023-10-11 22:19 ` Junio C Hamano
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=67638fd7-ad63-4e20-87e1-bef121fef197@gmail.com \
--to=phillip.wood123@gmail.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitgitgadget@gmail.com \
--cc=newren@gmail.com \
--cc=peff@peff.net \
--cc=phillip.wood@dunelm.org.uk \
--cc=winglovet@gmail.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).