Theirs merge strategy

[git@xxxxxxxxxxxx]

Would it be possible to revisit the decision to not have a "theirs" 
merge strategy?

I think there are legitimate reasons to use it, beyond the plenty of 
rope argument.

One example is you're working with a successfully written and operating 
branch through multiple releases, but due to some external change 
(product direction, upstream changes) you decide that an approach in a 
different branch is better.  You want to use the other branch, while 
keeping the history of the successful prior releases, for all the normal 
reasons one wants to keep history.  A hard reset wouldn't help in this case.

The decision to remove it was to prevent people from having bad 
workflows.  In reality, in lieu of theirs people use ours in reverse 
which is even worse.

The previous discussion I found was at 
https://marc.info/?l=git&m=121637513604413&w=2