Hi, On Tue, 23 Oct 2007, Steffen Prohaska wrote: > > On Oct 23, 2007, at 1:35 AM, Jakub Narebski wrote: > > > 2. Git can do a merge with conflicts _only_ if that branch is checked > > out. > > Andreas' proposal contains an important requirement that avoids this > problem. His proposal states "when they, prior to fetching, pointed to > the same commit [the head in remotes pointed to]". That is only > fast-forwards are needed, which never have merge conflicts. You know what I do not like with this proposal? The whole _point_ of this discussion is to make git _easier_. Go ahead, try to explain to a complete git newbie the proposed behaviour. I have a pound here which says that there is _no_ _way_ that this newbie says "well, that's easy". Some people may not get this, but git has a reputation of being complicated, and my "BS" argument was, is, and will be, that we should keep clear and simple semantics, because they are the _only_ way to battle that reputation. Ciao, Dscho - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
