Johannes Sixt <j.sixt@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> If --conflict is basically the same as --merge, couldn't we then pass
> style argument to --merge or omit it to get the default style?
I originally was thinking about doing it that way, but the option parsing
would become somewhat hairly.
$ git checkout --merge=diff3 foo
$ git checkout --merge diff3 foo
$ git checkout --merge diff3
The first one is clearly "switch to branch 'foo'; simple 2-way read-tree
may find the changes in my working tree conflicting and refuse, so use
3-way merge to resolve such conflicts and express the conflicts in diff3
style".
The third one is "switch to branch 'diff3'; don't barf on conflicting
working tree changes; 3-way merge them".
What about the second one? Is it "switch to 'foo', express conflicts in
diff3 style", or "checkout path foo from tree-ish diff3"?
It is the former, but that is only because the latter is an error (-m is
defined only for checking things out of the index). That is not something
parse-options can easily/cleanly do.
--
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
