[Resend because of address confusion in replied-to email.] On 07/07/2013 08:00 PM, Thomas Rast wrote: > I recently looked into making merge-recursive more useful as a modular > piece in various tasks, e.g. Michael's git-imerge and the experiments > I made in showing evil merges. > > This miniseries is the extremely low-hanging fruit. If it makes a > good first step for git-imerge, perhaps it can go in like this. It's > not a big speedup (about 2.2s vs 2.4s in a sample conflicting merge in > git.git), but it does feel much cleaner to avoid touching the worktree > unless actually necessary. > > Otherwise it's probably not worth it just yet; for what I want to do > with it, we need some more reshuffling of things. Interesting. For git-imerge, it would be nice to speed up merges by skipping the working tree updates. 10% might not be so noticeable, but every little bit helps :-) But the killer benefit would be if git-imerge could do some of its automatic merge-testing and autofilling in the background while the user is resolving conflicts in the main index and working tree. Is it possible to use this option with an alternate index file (e.g., via the GIT_INDEX_FILE environment variable)? Can it be made to leave other shared state (e.g., MERGE_HEAD) alone? If so, maybe it's already there. For this feature to be useful for test merges, it would be enough to just get a retcode saying whether a given merge would succeed or conflict. For it to be used for autofilling, it would also be necessary to be able to create a commit from the merge result in the alternate index (this would only be done when there are no conflicts). I assume this part can be done in the usual way using "git commit-tree". Michael -- Michael Haggerty mhagger@xxxxxxxxxxxx http://softwareswirl.blogspot.com/ -- 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