On Fri, Oct 7, 2011 at 2:01 PM, Jay Soffian <jaysoffian@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I actually think a better choice would be to remove commit_tree() from
> merge and always have it run commit externally. I'm not seriously
> suggesting that be done, but it would make git more consistent. But
> I'm not going to send in a patch which makes the situation worse.
The other inconsistencies I'm aware of between "merge --no-commit &&
commit" vs "merge" on a clean merge are:
* reflog
- merge uses either "Merge made by the '...' strategy." OR "In-index merge"
- commit uses "commit (merge) <subject>"
* hooks
- merge calls
1) "prepare-commit-msg MERGE_MSG merge"
2) "post-merge [0|1]" where [0|1] indicates a squash or not.
- commit calls
1) "pre-commit"
2) "prepare-commit-msg COMMIT_EDITMSG merge"
3) "commit-msg COMMIT_EDITMSG"
4) "post-commit"
* gc
- merge calls "git gc --auto" after a successful merge unless
--squash was used
- commit does not call "git gc --auto"
* diffstat: merge shows it, commit does not
j.
--
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