On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 01:46:48PM -0500, Jeff King wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 12:12 AM, Jay Soffian <jaysoffian@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Always calling the thing on the left-side of a merge "local" and on the > > > right side "remote" isn't correct. You could be rebasing, in which case > > > the left side is the new base/upstream and the right side is the saved > > > commits which are being re-applied. So, > > I'll try out your patch and comment next time I use it. I finally got a chance to use this today (hey, I don't get a lot of conflicts!). I like it; I think it made it a lot more obvious which side was which during the rebase. I checked with cherry-pick, as well; it more or less makes sense, except that the cherry-picked commit is called "upstream." Which sort of makes sense, but it would be nice to call it something more obvious. Unfortunately I'm not sure that there is a good way to determine we are in a failed cherry-pick (probably a failed 'revert' is in a similar situation). So like I said before, I think the eventual "right" thing is to have a more verbose status file. But in the meantime, I think this patch is sensible. -Peff - 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
