Sergey Organov wrote: > Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > Sergey Organov wrote: > >> Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > >> > 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. > > > > The issue here is not a mere inner section, it's a nested inner section > > due to a recursive merge. > > No, this one is just generic suggestion by Junio to improve > documentation, unrelated to particular problematic contents of the inner > section of diff3. OK, but diff3 is not always just merge minus some stuff. It would be nice if it was, which is what triggered the proposal of zdiff3: https://lore.kernel.org/git/20130306150548.GC15375@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ -- Felipe Contreras
