On 11/08/2011 07:46 AM, Jeff King wrote: > On Mon, Nov 07, 2011 at 03:45:48PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > But I think there are two questions: > [ snip ] > > I'm actually not sure which one Ori was asking about. > I'm actually interested in both :) Here's a copy of the description of my problem from another reply: > I'm dealing with two codebases that have branched in the past, before > any VCS was used, and now I'm tracking both separately with git. I'm > trying to apply changes from one to the other with format-patch and > git-am/apply. In answer to your first question > 1. Should am's 3-way fallback be made more easily available to users > of regular "apply"? git-am is never part of this workflow as I'm trying to move patches between separate repositories with no shared root. <rant> And, personally, I don't think git-am is named correctly as the only use-case I have for it is applying+committing single patches produced by format-patch and sent as individual files over some medium which isn't mboxes (I'm not that old-school). I never understood why git-apply can't do the commit and I have to instead use a tool with 'mail' in its name (Let's ignore the historical reasons) -- Shouldn't git-am be an mbox-reading wrapper around some more basic patch-applying tool? </rant> >> 2. Short of doing a 3-way merge, are there better ways to represent >> failed hunks in the patch target itself, rather than saving ".rej" >> files? I really want this as .rej files feel very un-git-like. However, after understanding the problems raised in this thread, I'm a bit more realistic :) -Ori -- 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