Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes:
> I don't think rerere helps here. In a rebase like this, the problem is
> that it _isn't_ the same conflict.
>
> Imagine a case like this:
> ...
> Applying the first commit gets this conflict (in diff3 form)
>
> <<<<<<< ours
> base
> another
> ||||||| base
> base
> =======
> one
> >>>>>>> theirs
>
> After we fix that up to "one\nanother", the second conflict is:
>
> <<<<<<< ours
> one
> another
> ||||||| base
> one
> =======
> two
> >>>>>>> theirs
>
> Likewise, even if you had done the original merge between branch tips,
> you'd have seen yet another conflict:
>
> <<<<<<< ours
> two
> ||||||| base
> base
> =======
> base
> another
> >>>>>>> theirs
>
> The actual lines changed are the same, but as the nearby context is
> continually shifting, we don't consider these to be the "same" conflict.
Correct. The conflict you see at each step may be trivial to
resolve, but would not "replay" at all, exactly because they are not
the same conflicts. Knowing that the user would resolve
base --> base/another
\ \
---> one--------- one/another
does not help us to decide that
base --> two -----------
\ \
---> base/another---???
is resolved to two/another.
