On May 2, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> Maybe --name-only or --name-status can help.
>
> Note that most conflicts will not show up here: if the merge result
> matches either parent, then git diff --cc and friends will not
> consider it interesting at all.
Isn't that a good definition of a trivial commit? I'm not talking
about the whole commit -- just any file that is not identical to one
of its parents.
> A command to list conflicts and their resolutions would be expensive
> but valuable, I think. A naïve implementation would involve redoing
> the merge.
> [...]
> A “merge diffstat” sounds like an interesting idea, but the detailed
> semantics are not obvious to me (maybe separate counts for
> nontrivial added and removed lines from each parent?).
OK, thanks for clarifying that. For my purpose, I basically just want
to know whether there was manual tweaking involved in the merge. (For
my thing I don't even need to see those changes, since I show the
overall push diff only.) What I ended up doing is pretty bad:
git show --pretty=short --name-only "$r" | grep -q '^Merge: '
--> test if it's a merge commit
git show --pretty=format:"" --name-only "$r" | grep -q "."
--> test if it's trivial
git show --pretty=format:"" "$r" | diffstat -p1
--> get the diffstated output
(My script generally "compensates" for git being fast by running a ton
of them for each email...)
--
((lambda (x) (x x)) (lambda (x) (x x))) Eli Barzilay:
http://barzilay.org/ Maze is Life!
--
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