Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > Johannes Sixt <j6t@xxxxxxxx> writes: > >> The case that inner conflicts are presented sub-optimally under diff3 >> remains, though. > > I agree that until that happens (necessary but not sufficient > condition), it is premature to recommend diff3 style to be the > default. Yep. A work-around could be to fix diff3 to rather produce RCS merge style in such situations? > > I notice that "git merge --help" tells what each part separated by > conflict markers mean in both output styles, but does not make a > specific recommendation as to which one to use in what situation, > and it might benefit a few additional sentences to help readers > based on what you said, i.e. the "RCS merge" style that hides the > original is succinct and easier to work with when you are familiar > with what both sides did, while a more verbose "diff3" style helps > when you are unfamiliar with what one side (or both sides) did. I don't get it. Once you have diff3 output, and you want something simpler, you just kill the inner section, right? RCS merge output style is simply inferior. Thanks, -- Sergey Organov
