Johannes Sixt wrote: > I understand that diff3 is very useful for an integrator like you who > does a lot of merges of code that was not written by yourself. > > But I would estimate that most conflicts (in absolute number among all > developers using Git) arise during rebase operations and cherry-picking, > i.e., while one is working on their own code. The vast majority of developers don't rebase their code. They only do it when absolutely necessary, and that is when they have to rebase it on top of another person's code. > In such sitations, the simpler conflict markup is sufficient, because > one knows the background and reason of the conflicts. I don't know about you, but I often don't know the background of my own code from one month ago, hell, sometimes not even one week ago. I consider myself from one year ago to be pretty much a different developer. > And then the ability to compact conflicts is a life-saver. I don't see how shifting one's sight a couple lines below would save anybody's life. On the other hand opening another tool just to find out was was the original code is tedious as hell. > Therefore, I argue that simple conflict style should remain the > default even if the presentation of inner conflicts under diff3 style > is improved. First let's get rid of all the assumptions you made above. Just because you personally do X doesn't mean most people do. Cheers. -- Felipe Contreras
