On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 10:14 AM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Sergey Organov <sorganov@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > >> You've already bit this poor thingy to death. Please rather try your >> teeth on the proposed Trivial Merge (TM) method. > > Whatever you do, do *NOT* call any part of your proposal "trivial > merge", unless you are actually using the term to mean what Git > calls "trivial merge". The phrase has an established meaning in Git > and your attempt to abuse it to mean something entirely different is > adding unnecessary hindrance for other people to understand what you > want to perform. Agreed, I think we need better terminology here, the current words for (TM) are definitely *not* trivial merges. Same for "angel merge", I don't think that term really works well either. The goal of the process is to split the merge apart to its components for each side branch and then bring them back together after applying them to the newly rebased branches.
