Hi, On Mon, 28 Jul 2008, Jeff King wrote: > On Mon, Jul 28, 2008 at 04:54:17PM +0200, Sverre Rabbelier wrote: > > > Thus resulting in a 'wrong way around' merge as part of master? It > > would say "Merge branch 'master' into otherbranch", while what > > happened was "Merge branch 'otherbranch' into master". > > > > So, in short: what does the list think about adding > > "git-merge-theirs", that does (although possibly less 'hackish'): > > > > cat > git-merge-theirs << EOF > > #!/bin/sh > > eval git read-tree --reset -u \\\$\$# > > EOF > > I ran into this exact situation while showing somebody how awesome git > was, and it was a little embarrasing to say "oops, now we have to do > this backwards." Well, I have to say that the workflow is a bit backwards if the person who _publishes_ the thing is the one saying "Ooops, my version no goodie, other version please, but so that pull still works". I would have expected the one who has the good version to make the choice. 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
