Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> git checkout --conflict=diff3 can be used to present conflicts hunks
> including text from the common ancestor:
>
> <<<<<<< ours
> ourside
> |||||||
> original
> =======
> theirside
> >>>>>>> theirs
>
> The added information can be very helpful for resolving a merge by
> hand, and merge tools can usually understand it without trouble
> because it looks like output from ‘diff3 -m’.
>
> Unfortunately, not all can: ‘diff3’ includes a label for the merge
> base on the ||||||| line and it seems some tools cannot parse conflict
> hunks without such a label. Humans could use help in interpreting the
> output, too. So mark the start of the text from the common ancestor
> with the label “||||||| original”.
>
> git rerere will not have trouble parsing this output, since instead of
> looking for a newline, it looks for whitespace after the |||||||
> marker.
Missing:
"... and adding the extra label will not affect the computed the conflict
identifier, so existing rerere database will not be invalidated with this
change either".
I didn't verified the above claim, but if it does not hold true, then we
need to think the transition strategy. I don't expect a problem, though.
> Reported-by: Stefan Monnier <monnier@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@xxxxxxxxx>
This "Reported" feels very odd for a feature enhancement ("Requested"
would be more appropriate) not a bugfix.
> ---
> Since “original” a good name for the common ancestor? I also
> considered “base” and “ancestor”; the latter is too jargon-y for my
> taste, but “base” seems all right.
Yeah, base sounds good. Even though at the lowest level, a merge is a
merge between two equals, people tend to think of the contents of their
own side "original" (vs the merge outcome "result").
--
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