Nanako Shiraishi <nanako3@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > Isn't what Caleb wants "-X ours/theirs" per-hunk option for merge strategy backends? > > It was discussed several months ago on the list and was rejected. For details you can start here: > > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/89010/focus=89021 > > I still think the patch in the above link was reasonable, but the thread > was distracted into discussing minor syntactical details of how the > option gets passed to the backend, and the rest of the discussion to > decide if it makes sense to add such a feature was unfortunately lost in > the noise and never concluded. I thought http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/89033 in the thread (and your response to it which is 89175) pretty much concluded the discussion. Is Caleb adding anything new to the discussion (iow, is there a convincing new argument why having such a merge is a good idea and what the workflow looks like that benefits from it)? -- 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
