Re: [PATCH] Re: Clarify documentation on the "ours" merge strategy.

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Thomas Rast <trast@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> Then again, I'm not sure if resolve vs. recursive makes a difference
> in a rebase.  Octopus is weird for a two-head merge, I'm not sure why

 ...

> +	If there is no `-s` option 'git-merge-recursive' is used
> +	instead.  This implies --merge.
> ++
> +Due to the peculiarities of 'git-rebase' (see \--merge above) the only
> +built-in strategy that is actually useful is 'subtree'.

"recursive is just a slower and sometimes buggier alternative to resolve
but can handle renames" may mean "people do not have much reason to choose
resolve over recursive".  But that is quite different from "resolve is not
useful here _due to_ the peculiarities of rebase".  Wouldn't anybody who
thinks "resolve vs. recursive would not make a difference in a rebase"
also think "resolve vs. recursive would not make a difference anywhere"?

58634db (rebase: Allow merge strategies to be used when rebasing,
2006-06-21) added "-m" and "-s" to rebase to solve the problem of rebasing
against an upstream that has moved files.  What the commit actually did
was to use recursive (by default) while giving longer rope to the users by
choosing other strategies with "-s", without making any judgement as to
why other strategies may possibly be useful.

Perhaps there is some different issue at the root of this one.  Why would
anybody be tempted to say "-s ours" while running a rebase?  What did the
user want to see it do (instead of being a no-op because "ours" by
definition ignores the tree the change is replayed from)?

It is easy to dismiss it as a user misconception and it also is tempting
to think that it would be helped with updated description of "ours" to
dispel that misconception, but there may be some user wish that is totally
different from "ours merge" strategy but still can be validly labelled
using a word "ours" by somebody who does not know the way the word "ours"
is used in the git land, and satisfying that unknown user wish might be
the real solution to this issue.


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]