From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.176.0/21 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.5 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MSGID_FROM_MTA_HEADER,RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: Question on rerere Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2006 17:29:45 -0800 Message-ID: <7vy7p3mk1i.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> References: <7vk60no0ua.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2006 01:30:04 +0000 (UTC) Cc: git@vger.kernel.org Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org In-Reply-To: <7vk60no0ua.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> (Junio C. Hamano's message of "Tue, 19 Dec 2006 16:41:33 -0800") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by dough.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1GwqHQ-0002j6-HN for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Wed, 20 Dec 2006 02:30:00 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S964784AbWLTB3u (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Dec 2006 20:29:50 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932904AbWLTB3s (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Dec 2006 20:29:48 -0500 Received: from fed1rmmtao05.cox.net ([68.230.241.34]:62168 "EHLO fed1rmmtao05.cox.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932918AbWLTB3r (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Dec 2006 20:29:47 -0500 Received: from fed1rmimpo01.cox.net ([70.169.32.71]) by fed1rmmtao05.cox.net (InterMail vM.6.01.06.03 201-2131-130-104-20060516) with ESMTP id <20061220012946.FKTV15640.fed1rmmtao05.cox.net@fed1rmimpo01.cox.net>; Tue, 19 Dec 2006 20:29:46 -0500 Received: from assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net ([68.5.247.80]) by fed1rmimpo01.cox.net with bizsmtp id 0pV41W00T1kojtg0000000; Tue, 19 Dec 2006 20:29:04 -0500 To: Johannes Schindelin Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Junio C Hamano writes: > Johannes Schindelin writes: > >> IIUC then each conflict hunk is handled _separately_ like this: the >> lexicographically smaller between the two file sections is displayed >> first, regardless if a previous hunk had a different order. Not that it >> matters most of the time, but isn't this dangerous? > > You are probably right. Probably the right thing would be to > use the first hunk to determine the flipping order and stick to > that for the rest. > > Not that I've seen problems with the current behaviour, though. Well, come to think of it, I think the current behaviour makes more sense. Suppose you start from an original file "OO". You have two branches that change it to "AO" and "BO", and another pair of branches that change it to "OC" and "OD". Let's call these branches A, B, C, and D. By merging A and C, you will get "AC"; you can get "AD", "BC" and "BD" the same way. Now suppose you are on "AC" and merged "BD". You would get "". If you were on "BD" and merged "AC" you would get "". If you were on "AD" and merged "BC" you would get "". You got the idea?