From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Johannes Schindelin Subject: Re: Guided merge with override Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2008 16:28:42 +0100 (BST) Message-ID: References: <93c3eada0806152116v2cef4035u272dc1a26005661a@mail.gmail.com> <20080616092554.GB29404@genesis.frugalware.org> <48563D6C.8060704@viscovery.net> <93c3eada0806161545m5c6e1073q5522ce31f72be9f0@mail.gmail.com> <7vve076d6t.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: geoffrey.russell@gmail.com, sverre@rabbelier.nl, Johannes Sixt , Miklos Vajna , git@vger.kernel.org To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Jun 18 17:31:28 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 1K8zcy-0006sx-K7 for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Wed, 18 Jun 2008 17:31:17 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752507AbYFRPaW (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Jun 2008 11:30:22 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752559AbYFRPaV (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Jun 2008 11:30:21 -0400 Received: from mail.gmx.net ([213.165.64.20]:41594 "HELO mail.gmx.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1752030AbYFRPaU (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Jun 2008 11:30:20 -0400 Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 18 Jun 2008 15:30:18 -0000 Received: from almond.st-and.ac.uk (EHLO almond.st-and.ac.uk) [138.251.155.241] by mail.gmx.net (mp011) with SMTP; 18 Jun 2008 17:30:18 +0200 X-Authenticated: #1490710 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1/QMyho8TjQz8PPWAHC6fpKOEkoNeSXg4bU/JKAUX b8v4D8Z6iO/v9K X-X-Sender: gene099@racer In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Alpine 1.00 (DEB 882 2007-12-20) X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Hi, On Wed, 18 Jun 2008, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > On Tue, 17 Jun 2008, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > > No, neither --theirs nor --ours option exists in your version of git. > > But here is a patch to add it to git-merge-file. > > Looks good, thanks! Just to be safe, this should be accompanied by tet > cases. But I did not see anything wrong with the patch. Thinking about this again, there could be a problem: in case of complex merges, it is possible that the sides are switched around for an intermediate merge. IOW you'd expect it to take "theirs", but it really takes "ours". Hrm. Ciao, Dscho