Thanks Erik, please post your further replies to the mailing list so
others could see it also.
On a topic,
I'm not familiar with Git code-base so don't know if it even possible in
it's current architecture..
On 28.12.2021 20:32, Erik Cervin Edin wrote:
That's my answer =)
I think adding a merge strategy option to checkout might be useful
On Mon, Dec 27, 2021 at 4:49 PM Andrey Butirsky <butirsky@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi, stumbling upon this again and again, so decided to write finally,
while in conflicting state, the only thing we can do to auto-pick one or
another side of conflict is passing --ours/--theirs option to git-checkout:
git checkout --ours/--theirs <path>
The problem is - it doesn't actually do a _merge_, i.e. you lose all
non-conflicted changes.
There is no easy way to solve that currently without third-party tools.
This link illustrates it:
https://stackoverflow.com/a/68498101/1063363
Proposal:
Shell we add -X <strategy-option> to git checkout <path> to allow it do
a merge and _actually solve_ merge conflicts?
That would be in-pair with other commands taking the option already:
git-merge, git-rebase, (etc.?)
