From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "norbert.nemec" Subject: Re: How to find and analyze bad merges? Date: Thu, 02 Feb 2012 13:10:06 +0100 Message-ID: References: <87haz97c2k.fsf@thomas.inf.ethz.ch> <4F2A70DA.6020107@native-instruments.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Feb 02 13:10:48 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RsvV0-0002iT-PE for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Thu, 02 Feb 2012 13:10:47 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755909Ab2BBMKl (ORCPT ); Thu, 2 Feb 2012 07:10:41 -0500 Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]:42859 "EHLO plane.gmane.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755904Ab2BBMKe (ORCPT ); Thu, 2 Feb 2012 07:10:34 -0500 Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RsvUn-0002ck-CT for git@vger.kernel.org; Thu, 02 Feb 2012 13:10:33 +0100 Received: from 46.231.181.199 ([46.231.181.199]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 02 Feb 2012 13:10:33 +0100 Received: from norbert.nemec by 46.231.181.199 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 02 Feb 2012 13:10:33 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 46.231.181.199 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:9.0) Gecko/20111222 Thunderbird/9.0.1 In-Reply-To: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Am 02.02.12 12:41, schrieb David Barr: > On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 10:17 PM, Norbert Nemec > wrote: >> To be yet more precise: >> >> My complaint is that you need this kind of sledge-hammer solutions to >> analyze the situation. I, as an semi-expert with git did manage to find the >> problem without even having to resort to bisect or manually redoing the >> merge. My complaint is about the perspective of the medium-experienced user >> who is completely puzzled by the fact that a >> "git log" silently skips the critical merge commit. > > Do the -c --cc or -m flags for git log help in this case? > They alter the way merge diffs are presented, as described under Diff Formatting > in the git-log(1) man page. Indeed, these help somewhat. This way, the changes are not hidden, but instead lost in the multitude of trivially-resolved conflicts...