Johannes Sixt wrote: > Am 17.12.20 um 06:41 schrieb Felipe Contreras: > > Seth House wrote: > >> I appreciate Felipe getting the discussion started. > >> > >> On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 02:24:23PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > >>> If there is none, then what is the benefit of doing the same thing > >>> without running 3 checkout-index? > >> > >> I wasn't aware of this plubming when I wrote the initial shell-script > >> version of the technique. This is a much better approach (even *if* > >> there's a negligible performance penalty). This nicely avoids > >> UNIX/Windows line-ending surprises, and instead leans on > >> already-configured Git defaults for those. Plus the non-text files > >> benefit you mentioned is also huge. > > > > I think you misunderstood. > > > > This command: > > > > git checkout-index --stage 2 --temp -- poem.txt > > > > Will give you *exactly* the same output as LOCAL. > > > > The context is "git mergetool", not the mergetool itself. > > > >>> as I understand "mergetool" is handed an > >>> already conflicted state and asked to resolve it, it would not be > >>> possible without at least looking at the stage #1 to recover the > >>> base for folks who do not use diff3 style. > >> > >> I feel strongly that LOCAL, REMOTE, and BASE should be left intact for > >> this reason, Also because they aid readers in understanding the > >> pre-conflicts versions of the file. > >> > >> Rather mergetools (that support it) should be given the stage 1-3 > >> versions of the file in addition to the usual, unmodified, above three. > >> Then each tool can decide whether or how to show each. Some graphical > >> tools might be able to make effective use of all five (six?). > > > > Except as you stated in your blog post, not a *single* tool does this > > correctly using LOCAL, REMOTE, and BASE. > > > > * Araxis: a mess of changes > > * Beyond Compare: a mess of changes > > * DiffMerge: a mess of changes > > * kdiff3: a mess of changes > > * Meld: a mess of changes > > * Sublime Merge: displays unnecessary changes > > * SmartGit: ignores the other files > > * Fork: displays unnecessary changes > > * P4Merge: displays unnecessary changes > > * IntelliJ: a mess of changes > > * Tortoise Merge: uncertain > > * tkdiff: displays unnecessary changes > > * vimdiff: so, so wrong > > * vimdiff2: displays unnecessary changes > > * diffconflicts: RIGHT! > > > > So all tools would benefit from the patch (except yours). > > > > Which tool would be negatively affected? > > Where's WinMerge in your list? It's not my list; it's Seth's list. > I'm mostly using WinMerge these days, and it can do what your patch > does all by itself. Really? Because under Wine it doesn't look like it: 1. Before: https://snipboard.io/8JA5Oz.jpg 2. After: https://snipboard.io/HUXnOg.jpg > I don't know, though, whether your patch would have a negative effect > for WinMerge. Seems like it has a *positive* effect. Like in all mergetools. Cheers. -- Felipe Contreras
