From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: Merge with local conflicts in new files Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 01:20:22 -0700 Message-ID: <7v4pzpjc55.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> References: <8aa486160605161500m1dd8428cj@mail.gmail.com> <7v1wut61aj.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <8aa486160605161611p4c9ddbc0v@mail.gmail.com> <7vu07p35xn.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <1147852052.31879.50.camel@dv> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed May 17 10:20:28 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FgHGd-0005do-6Z for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Wed, 17 May 2006 10:20:27 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932475AbWEQIUY (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 May 2006 04:20:24 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932476AbWEQIUY (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 May 2006 04:20:24 -0400 Received: from fed1rmmtao08.cox.net ([68.230.241.31]:16361 "EHLO fed1rmmtao08.cox.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932475AbWEQIUX (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 May 2006 04:20:23 -0400 Received: from assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net ([68.4.9.127]) by fed1rmmtao08.cox.net (InterMail vM.6.01.06.01 201-2131-130-101-20060113) with ESMTP id <20060517082023.ONAO27967.fed1rmmtao08.cox.net@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>; Wed, 17 May 2006 04:20:23 -0400 To: Pavel Roskin In-Reply-To: <1147852052.31879.50.camel@dv> (Pavel Roskin's message of "Wed, 17 May 2006 03:47:32 -0400") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110004 (No Gnus v0.4) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Pavel Roskin writes: > I'm afraid this approach, while understandable from the technical > standpoint, could prevent git from ever becoming a version control > system that "just works" without any porcelains. > > I know a person who refuses to use any version control. If he > encountered this situation, he would never try any version control > again. > > After all, we are talking about files in the _working_ directory. It's > not merely a transient appendix to the repository. git is not the only > player here. If a file doesn't "belong" to git, it belongs to its > "supreme commander", i.e. the user, and should be approached with utmost > care. I am biased ;-) and appreciate corrections like this. How does the updated patch I just sent out look?