Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > Sergey Organov <sorganov@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > >> 2. We have descriptive long name for every other option, and it'd be an >> exception if we'd have none for --diff-merges=m. In fact, it's >> --diff-merges=m that could have been removed, but it'd break resemblance >> with --cc and -c that both do have their --diff-merges=cc and >> --diff-merges=c counterparts. > > Hmph, a devil's advocate in me suspects that it may just be arguing > why user-configurable 'default' is a bad idea, though. After you've said this I figured the option might have been simply called --diff-merges=on. Recall that we already have --diff-merges=off. Makes more sense than --diff-merges=default? -- Sergey Organov
