From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: more merge strategies : feature request Date: Wed, 03 Dec 2008 18:15:06 -0800 Message-ID: <7vabbc7kk5.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> References: <81bfc67a0811290848m6cb219c0y71a7266001096f2d@mail.gmail.com> <4933AC03.6050300@op5.se> <81bfc67a0812020546o79906a20jcd04bd42d18dd803@mail.gmail.com> <20081204062717.6117@nanako3.lavabit.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: "Leo Razoumov" , "Caleb Cushing" , git@vger.kernel.org To: Nanako Shiraishi X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Dec 04 03:16:39 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1L83ld-0005eh-LC for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Thu, 04 Dec 2008 03:16:38 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754658AbYLDCPT (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Dec 2008 21:15:19 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1756535AbYLDCPT (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Dec 2008 21:15:19 -0500 Received: from a-sasl-fastnet.sasl.smtp.pobox.com ([207.106.133.19]:51853 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756131AbYLDCPN (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Dec 2008 21:15:13 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by a-sasl-fastnet.sasl.smtp.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F1D1384807; Wed, 3 Dec 2008 21:15:12 -0500 (EST) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [68.225.240.211]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by a-sasl-fastnet.sasl.smtp.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E2E5784806; Wed, 3 Dec 2008 21:15:07 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <20081204062717.6117@nanako3.lavabit.com> (Nanako Shiraishi's message of "Thu, 04 Dec 2008 06:27:17 +0900") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 620F3BF4-C1A9-11DD-86B9-5720C92D7133-77302942!a-sasl-fastnet.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Nanako Shiraishi writes: > Isn't what Caleb wants "-X ours/theirs" per-hunk option for merge strategy backends? > > It was discussed several months ago on the list and was rejected. For details you can start here: > > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/89010/focus=89021 > > I still think the patch in the above link was reasonable, but the thread > was distracted into discussing minor syntactical details of how the > option gets passed to the backend, and the rest of the discussion to > decide if it makes sense to add such a feature was unfortunately lost in > the noise and never concluded. I thought http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/89033 in the thread (and your response to it which is 89175) pretty much concluded the discussion. Is Caleb adding anything new to the discussion (iow, is there a convincing new argument why having such a merge is a good idea and what the workflow looks like that benefits from it)?