Junio C Hamano <junkio@xxxxxxx> wrote: > Shawn Pearce <spearce@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > Good reasons, but all are strictly historical. So there's actually > > no technical reason we can't use merge-recursive here in git-am. > > A very early version of recursive was unusable (it did not pay > attention to the merge base the caller gave it and tried to > always compute it by itself), but that was fixed sometime later. > > I do not recall offhand C version still has that fix (I think it > does but you should double check); as long ias it honors the > merge base the caller computed, it should be Ok to replace > resolve with recursive. Go wild. I checked. It does use the merge base supplied by the caller, but only if the caller supplies only one merge base. Otherwise it computes its own. This isn't a problem for git-am as we only supply one merge base. What was a problem was git-am supplies trees, not commits, and the code internally uses commits. I fixed that in patch 9/11 'Allow merging bare trees' in my recent series. -- Shawn. - 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