On 26/05/2021 15:30, Elijah Newren wrote:
On Tue, May 25, 2021 at 1:22 AM Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi,
Supposed that we have following commit graph:
----A----B----C----D <- master
\
----E <- e
When we merge e branch by `git merge e`, obviously we will do 3-way
merge. Assumed that the merge doesn't conflict, Git will fire up
editor to edit `COMMIT_EDITMSG` for us to enter merge commit
message. Then we abort the commit by either delete all the lines
there, or comment all of them.
But when we check status by `git status`, Git says:
On branch master
All conflicts fixed but you are still merging.
(use "git commit" to conclude merge)
That message above is misleading, because we know that our merge
doesn't conflict (3-way merge applied successfully without conflict).
However, it makes sense only when we have resolved all conflicts
on the conflicted merge.
Once upon a time, that message would have always been right. Then a
--no-commit option was introduced to git merge, and editing of commit
messages for merges was also added. As you note, both of those can
yield cases where the message is misleading/surprising.
So for non-conflicted merge, we can say instead:
On branch <branch>
You are still merging, and the merge applied without any conflicts.
(use "git commit" to conclude merge)
At the time this message is printed, there is no way for us to know
whether there had been conflicts. We'd have to record that
information somewhere (probably the index, though introducing another
index format just for this seems like a really high lift for such a
small thing, and may conflict with other efforts to extend the index
format, such as the sparse-index work),
Can we use the information that `git update-index --unresolve` uses to
tell that there were conflicts? I'm not clear when that data gets
cleared from the index - if it's not cleared when we commit then it wont
be much use for this.
Best Wishes
Phillip
OR re-do the merge when the
user runs status just to find out whether there had been conflicts
(which seems like overkill, and would require you to know which merge
backend had been used and with which flags so you could re-check with
the same one; further, three of the merge backends -- recursive,
resolve, and octopus -- all update the working tree and index and thus
could not be used for a case like this).
Seems like opening a really big can of worms.
