{"thread":{"id":"53898","subject":"Improving merge of tricky conflicts","startedAt":"2020-07-21T23:29:55Z","lastAt":"2021-01-21T21:11:24Z","messageCount":25,"participants":["B. Stebler","Johannes Sixt","Jeff King","Junio C Hamano","Sergey Organov","Bono Stebler","Jacob Keller","Martin von Zweigbergk"],"isPatch":false,"patchVersion":null,"patchTotal":null},"messages":[{"id":"401834","messageId":"a0418859-c62e-c207-a1b0-1b1aaf178527@gmail.com","threadId":"53898","inReplyTo":null,"subject":"Improving merge of tricky conflicts","fromName":"B. Stebler","fromEmail":"bono.stebler@gmail.com","sentAt":"2020-07-21T23:29:51Z","receivedAt":"2020-07-21T23:29:55Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"bono.stebler@gmail.com","avatar":null},"body":"Hi,\n\nI have been looking for a tool to display merge conflicts, that instead \nof showing the two versions of the conflicting section, would show the \ndiff for that section in both conflicting commits.\n\nThe situation that would benefit a lot from this is when one branch has \nmodified a large section of code (e.g. change in indentation), while the \nother branch has only a small change. In that case git will display the \nentire modified section twice, making it very hard to spot the difference.\n\nBeing able to see both commits diff would immediately make it clear how \nto apply the small change into the branch with the large edit.\n\nI've looked around but couldn't find anything, but I'm pretty sure \nsolutions exists. Anyone knows of an existing tool / script that does this?\n\nThank you,\nB. Stebler\n\n"},{"id":"401839","messageId":"4df975f0-e4b1-afa1-cac1-f38e6d31a0d8@kdbg.org","threadId":"53898","inReplyTo":"a0418859-c62e-c207-a1b0-1b1aaf178527@gmail.com","subject":"Re: Improving merge of tricky conflicts","fromName":"Johannes Sixt","fromEmail":"j6t@kdbg.org","sentAt":"2020-07-22T05:50:08Z","receivedAt":"2020-07-22T05:50:12Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"j6t@kdbg.org","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/14810926?v=4"},"body":"Am 22.07.20 um 01:29 schrieb B. Stebler:\n> I have been looking for a tool to display merge conflicts, that instead\n> of showing the two versions of the conflicting section, would show the\n> diff for that section in both conflicting commits.\n\nPerhaps you want to configure `merge.conflictStyle=diff3`? It does not\nexactly show a diff, but it writes the base version of the conflicted\npart in addition to \"ours\" and \"theirs\".\n\n-- Hannes\n"},{"id":"401843","messageId":"20200722074530.GB3306468@coredump.intra.peff.net","threadId":"53898","inReplyTo":"4df975f0-e4b1-afa1-cac1-f38e6d31a0d8@kdbg.org","subject":"Re: Improving merge of tricky conflicts","fromName":"Jeff King","fromEmail":"peff@peff.net","sentAt":"2020-07-22T07:45:30Z","receivedAt":"2020-07-22T07:45:34Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"peff@peff.net","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/45925?v=4"},"body":"On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 07:50:08AM +0200, Johannes Sixt wrote:\n\n> Am 22.07.20 um 01:29 schrieb B. Stebler:\n> > I have been looking for a tool to display merge conflicts, that instead\n> > of showing the two versions of the conflicting section, would show the\n> > diff for that section in both conflicting commits.\n> \n> Perhaps you want to configure `merge.conflictStyle=diff3`? It does not\n> exactly show a diff, but it writes the base version of the conflicted\n> part in addition to \"ours\" and \"theirs\".\n\nYeah, I find diff3 is usually sufficient. But the contents of the base,\n\"ours\", and \"theirs\" sides are also available in the index:\n\n # diff between base (stage 1) and ours (stage 2)\n git diff :1:file :2:file\n\n # diff between base (stage 1) and theirs (stage 3)\n git diff :1:file :3:file\n\nI thought we had added nice aliases for \"ours\" and \"theirs\" instead of\nthe hard-to-remember stage numbers, but I think we only did so for\nthings like \"git checkout --ours\", etc.\n\nThe big downside here, of course, is that it's showing the diff for the\nwhole file, not just one hunk (on the other hand, I often find the\ntrickiest conflicts are ones where the changes unexpectedly span\nmultiple hunks).\n\nThere's also git-mergetool, which uses the information in those stages\nto feed content to other tools, which may show conflicts in more\nadvanced ways. I don't have opinions on any of the particular tools it\nsupports, but \"git mergetool --tool-help\" might be a good place to start\nexploring.\n\n-Peff\n"},{"id":"401848","messageId":"xmqqmu3r5umr.fsf@gitster.c.googlers.com","threadId":"53898","inReplyTo":"20200722074530.GB3306468@coredump.intra.peff.net","subject":"Re: Improving merge of tricky conflicts","fromName":"Junio C Hamano","fromEmail":"gitster@pobox.com","sentAt":"2020-07-22T17:26:04Z","receivedAt":"2020-07-22T17:26:12Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"gitster@pobox.com","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/54884?v=4"},"body":"Jeff King writes:\n\n> On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 07:50:08AM +0200, Johannes Sixt wrote:\n>\n>> Am 22.07.20 um 01:29 schrieb B. Stebler:\n>> > I have been looking for a tool to display merge conflicts, that instead\n>> > of showing the two versions of the conflicting section, would show the\n>> > diff for that section in both conflicting commits.\n>> \n>> Perhaps you want to configure `merge.conflictStyle=diff3`? It does not\n>> exactly show a diff, but it writes the base version of the conflicted\n>> part in addition to \"ours\" and \"theirs\".\n>\n> Yeah, I find diff3 is usually sufficient. But the contents of the base,\n> \"ours\", and \"theirs\" sides are also available in the index:\n>\n> # diff between base (stage 1) and ours (stage 2)\n> git diff :1:file :2:file\n>\n> # diff between base (stage 1) and theirs (stage 3)\n> git diff :1:file :3:file\n>\n> I thought we had added nice aliases for \"ours\" and \"theirs\" instead of\n> the hard-to-remember stage numbers, but I think we only did so for\n> things like \"git checkout --ours\", etc.\n>\n> The big downside here, of course, is that it's showing the diff for the\n> whole file, not just one hunk (on the other hand, I often find the\n> trickiest conflicts are ones where the changes unexpectedly span\n> multiple hunks).\n\nYup, I often find myself comparing the base part (lines between |||\nand ===) with our part (lines between <<< and |||) and their part\n(lines between === and >>>) while looking at the diff3 output to see\nwhat unique change each side did, in order to come up with a\nconflict resolution.\n\nI do this often enough to wonder if I should write a small \"filter\"\nthat I can pipe a whole \"diff3\" <<< ... ||| ... === ... >>> region\nto and convert it into to diffs, but not often enough to motivate\nme to actually write one ;-).\n"},{"id":"401856","messageId":"874kpzmhis.fsf@osv.gnss.ru","threadId":"53898","inReplyTo":"4df975f0-e4b1-afa1-cac1-f38e6d31a0d8@kdbg.org","subject":"Re: Improving merge of tricky conflicts","fromName":"Sergey Organov","fromEmail":"sorganov@gmail.com","sentAt":"2020-07-22T20:17:15Z","receivedAt":"2020-07-22T20:17:21Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"sorganov@gmail.com","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/8501568?v=4"},"body":"Johannes Sixt writes:\n\n> Am 22.07.20 um 01:29 schrieb B. Stebler:\n>> I have been looking for a tool to display merge conflicts, that instead\n>> of showing the two versions of the conflicting section, would show the\n>> diff for that section in both conflicting commits.\n>\n> Perhaps you want to configure `merge.conflictStyle=diff3`?\n\nIs there 'git merge' command-line option for that? I failed to find one.\n\nThanks,\n-- Sergey\n"},{"id":"401862","messageId":"xmqqwo2v45hq.fsf@gitster.c.googlers.com","threadId":"53898","inReplyTo":"874kpzmhis.fsf@osv.gnss.ru","subject":"Re: Improving merge of tricky conflicts","fromName":"Junio C Hamano","fromEmail":"gitster@pobox.com","sentAt":"2020-07-22T21:14:25Z","receivedAt":"2020-07-22T21:14:31Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"gitster@pobox.com","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/54884?v=4"},"body":"Sergey Organov writes:\n\n> Johannes Sixt writes:\n>\n>> Am 22.07.20 um 01:29 schrieb B. Stebler:\n>>> I have been looking for a tool to display merge conflicts, that instead\n>>> of showing the two versions of the conflicting section, would show the\n>>> diff for that section in both conflicting commits.\n>>\n>> Perhaps you want to configure `merge.conflictStyle=diff3`?\n>\n> Is there 'git merge' command-line option for that? I failed to find one.\n\nThere isn't, unless you count\n\n $ git -c merge.conflictstyle=diff3 merge side-branch\n\nas a \"command line option\" (which may technically is).\n"},{"id":"401865","messageId":"87tuxzl00h.fsf@osv.gnss.ru","threadId":"53898","inReplyTo":"xmqqwo2v45hq.fsf@gitster.c.googlers.com","subject":"Re: Improving merge of tricky conflicts","fromName":"Sergey Organov","fromEmail":"sorganov@gmail.com","sentAt":"2020-07-22T21:20:46Z","receivedAt":"2020-07-22T21:20:53Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"sorganov@gmail.com","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/8501568?v=4"},"body":"Junio C Hamano writes:\n\n> Sergey Organov writes:\n>\n>> Johannes Sixt writes:\n>>\n>>> Am 22.07.20 um 01:29 schrieb B. Stebler:\n>>>> I have been looking for a tool to display merge conflicts, that instead\n>>>> of showing the two versions of the conflicting section, would show the\n>>>> diff for that section in both conflicting commits.\n>>>\n>>> Perhaps you want to configure `merge.conflictStyle=diff3`?\n>>\n>> Is there 'git merge' command-line option for that? I failed to find one.\n>\n> There isn't, unless you count\n>\n> $ git -c merge.conflictstyle=diff3 merge side-branch\n>\n> as a \"command line option\" (which may technically is).\n\nYeah, I thought of maybe making an alias for that, so apparently I do\ncount it as command line option, thanks!\n\n-- Sergey\n"},{"id":"401869","messageId":"7c3cf4f4-c8aa-66d6-ae6f-88271e21d5ae@gmail.com","threadId":"53898","inReplyTo":"4df975f0-e4b1-afa1-cac1-f38e6d31a0d8@kdbg.org","subject":"Re: Improving merge of tricky conflicts","fromName":"Bono Stebler","fromEmail":"bono.stebler@gmail.com","sentAt":"2020-07-22T22:48:33Z","receivedAt":"2020-07-22T22:48:39Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"bono.stebler@gmail.com","avatar":null},"body":"Thank you for your reply, and everyone else in the thread. I've played \nwith diff3 and while it is slightly better in some cases, I feel there \nis a much better solution. To illustrate:\n\nCommit 1: https://i.snipboard.io/Ssm7M9.jpg\nCommit 2: https://i.snipboard.io/l2pqdT.jpg\nDiff3: https://i.snipboard.io/teb1RS.jpg\n\nWhat I would actually want: https://i.snipboard.io/8dOHgV.jpg\n\nAfter looking at it and some research, I've managed to mostly automate \nit. You need to manually set the filename, which isn't as convenient as \nhaving the details directly in the file, but it beats rummaging in \ncommits manually by a lot:\n\n# Patch failed at 0001 smol commit\n\nFILENAME=\"conflicting.txt\"\n\nTHEIRS=$(head -1 .git/rebase-apply/0001 | awk '{ print $2 }')\n\nOURS=$(git rev-parse HEAD)\n\nTHEIRS_DIFF=$(git -c color.ui=always show -U0 $THEIRS $FILENAME | tail \n-n +12)\n\nOURS_DIFF=$(git -c color.ui=always show -U0 $OURS $FILENAME | tail -n +12)\n\nprintf \"<<<<<<<<\\n$OURS_DIFF\\n========\\n$THEIRS_DIFF\\n>>>>>>>>\\n\"\n\nVoilà, feel free to use that or suggest improvements, I am by no means a \nbash or git wizard!\n\nCheers,\nB\n\nOn 22/07/2020 07:50, Johannes Sixt wrote:\n> Am 22.07.20 um 01:29 schrieb B. Stebler:\n>> I have been looking for a tool to display merge conflicts, that instead\n>> of showing the two versions of the conflicting section, would show the\n>> diff for that section in both conflicting commits.\n> Perhaps you want to configure `merge.conflictStyle=diff3`? It does not\n> exactly show a diff, but it writes the base version of the conflicted\n> part in addition to \"ours\" and \"theirs\".\n>\n> -- Hannes\n"},{"id":"401951","messageId":"20200723182549.GB3975154@coredump.intra.peff.net","threadId":"53898","inReplyTo":"xmqqmu3r5umr.fsf@gitster.c.googlers.com","subject":"Re: Improving merge of tricky conflicts","fromName":"Jeff King","fromEmail":"peff@peff.net","sentAt":"2020-07-23T18:25:49Z","receivedAt":"2020-07-23T18:25:51Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"peff@peff.net","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/45925?v=4"},"body":"On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 10:26:04AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:\n\n> > The big downside here, of course, is that it's showing the diff for the\n> > whole file, not just one hunk (on the other hand, I often find the\n> > trickiest conflicts are ones where the changes unexpectedly span\n> > multiple hunks).\n> \n> Yup, I often find myself comparing the base part (lines between |||\n> and ===) with our part (lines between <<< and |||) and their part\n> (lines between === and >>>) while looking at the diff3 output to see\n> what unique change each side did, in order to come up with a\n> conflict resolution.\n> \n> I do this often enough to wonder if I should write a small \"filter\"\n> that I can pipe a whole \"diff3\" <<< ... ||| ... === ... >>> region\n> to and convert it into to diffs, but not often enough to motivate\n> me to actually write one ;-).\n\nI would definitely have found that useful before (usually when one side\nmade a tiny one-line change and the other side deleted or drastically\nchanged a huge chunk).\n\nIt might even be possible to stuff it into xdiff's fill_conflict_hunk().\nWe have all of the data there, and xdiff in theory can make diffs. :) It\nmight be easier to prototype it as an external filter, though.\n\nSomething like the script below seems to work; you can run whole files\nthrough it, or do something like \":10,20r!perl foo.pl\" in vim to filter\na snippet. I won't be at all surprised if somebody more familiar with\nvim tells me that you can already do something way better than this\n(I've always found vimdiff pretty confusing).\n\n-- >8 --\n#!/usr/bin/perl\n\nuse File::Temp;\nuse strict;\n\nmy (@base, @ours, @theirs);\nmy $state;\n\nsub flush {\n print @ours;\n print \"|||||||\\n\";\n show_diff(base => \\@base, ours => \\@ours);\n print \"|||||||\\n\";\n show_diff(base => \\@base, theirs => \\@theirs);\n print \"=======\\n\";\n print @theirs;\n @ours = @base = @theirs = ();\n}\n\nsub show_diff {\n my ($pre_name, $pre_data, $post_name, $post_data) = @_;\n\n my $pre = File::Temp->new;\n print $pre @$pre_data;\n $pre->flush;\n\n my $post = File::Temp->new;\n print $post @$post_data;\n $post->flush;\n\n open(my $diff, '-|', qw(diff -u), $pre->filename, $post->filename);\n # throw away file header, which just mentions tempfiles, and replace\n # it with our own\n <$diff>; <$diff>;\n print \"--- $pre_name\\n\";\n print \"+++ $post_name\\n\";\n while (<$diff>) {\n print;\n }\n}\n\nsub state_none {\n if (/^<{7}/) { $state = \\&state_ours }\n print\n}\n\nsub state_ours {\n if (/^\\|{7}/) { $state = \\&state_base }\n else { push @ours, $_ }\n}\n\nsub state_base {\n if (/^={7}/) { $state = \\&state_theirs }\n else { push @base, $_ }\n}\n\nsub state_theirs {\n if (/^>{7}/) { flush(); print; $state = \\&state_none }\n else { push @theirs, $_ }\n}\n\n$state = \\&state_none;\nwhile (<>) {\n $state->();\n}\n"},{"id":"401952","messageId":"20200723182648.GC3975154@coredump.intra.peff.net","threadId":"53898","inReplyTo":"87tuxzl00h.fsf@osv.gnss.ru","subject":"Re: Improving merge of tricky conflicts","fromName":"Jeff King","fromEmail":"peff@peff.net","sentAt":"2020-07-23T18:26:48Z","receivedAt":"2020-07-23T18:26:50Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"peff@peff.net","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/45925?v=4"},"body":"On Thu, Jul 23, 2020 at 12:20:46AM +0300, Sergey Organov wrote:\n\n> >> Is there 'git merge' command-line option for that? I failed to find one.\n> >\n> > There isn't, unless you count\n> >\n> > $ git -c merge.conflictstyle=diff3 merge side-branch\n> >\n> > as a \"command line option\" (which may technically is).\n> \n> Yeah, I thought of maybe making an alias for that, so apparently I do\n> count it as command line option, thanks!\n\nYou can also do it after \"git merge\" aborts with conflicts by running:\n\n git checkout --conflict=diff3 my-file\n\nbut do note that it will check out from the index, overwriting any\nresolution you've already done in that file.\n\n-Peff\n"},{"id":"401954","messageId":"87blk6yrlc.fsf@osv.gnss.ru","threadId":"53898","inReplyTo":"20200723182648.GC3975154@coredump.intra.peff.net","subject":"Re: Improving merge of tricky conflicts","fromName":"Sergey Organov","fromEmail":"sorganov@gmail.com","sentAt":"2020-07-23T19:11:11Z","receivedAt":"2020-07-23T19:11:18Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"sorganov@gmail.com","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/8501568?v=4"},"body":"Jeff King writes:\n\n> On Thu, Jul 23, 2020 at 12:20:46AM +0300, Sergey Organov wrote:\n>\n>> >> Is there 'git merge' command-line option for that? I failed to find one.\n>> >\n>> > There isn't, unless you count\n>> >\n>> > $ git -c merge.conflictstyle=diff3 merge side-branch\n>> >\n>> > as a \"command line option\" (which may technically is).\n>> \n>> Yeah, I thought of maybe making an alias for that, so apparently I do\n>> count it as command line option, thanks!\n>\n> You can also do it after \"git merge\" aborts with conflicts by running:\n>\n> git checkout --conflict=diff3 my-file\n>\n> but do note that it will check out from the index, overwriting any\n> resolution you've already done in that file.\n\nReally nice trick, thanks for sharing!\n\nThough now it gets really odd \"git merge\" itself doesn't have this\noption.\n\n-- Sergey\n"},{"id":"401966","messageId":"xmqqimedq5c8.fsf@gitster.c.googlers.com","threadId":"53898","inReplyTo":"87blk6yrlc.fsf@osv.gnss.ru","subject":"Re: Improving merge of tricky conflicts","fromName":"Junio C Hamano","fromEmail":"gitster@pobox.com","sentAt":"2020-07-23T21:39:03Z","receivedAt":"2020-07-23T21:39:11Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"gitster@pobox.com","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/54884?v=4"},"body":"Sergey Organov writes:\n\n>> You can also do it after \"git merge\" aborts with conflicts by running:\n>>\n>> git checkout --conflict=diff3 my-file\n>>\n>> but do note that it will check out from the index, overwriting any\n>> resolution you've already done in that file.\n>\n> Though now it gets really odd \"git merge\" itself doesn't have this\n> option.\n\nA command line option is cumbersome that you have to type it every\ntime, so configuration variable makes 100% more sense than an option\nto \"git merge\". \n\nIf your merge used the merge (as opposed to diff3) style, and seeing\nthat the resulting conflict is not easy to review and you wish you\nused diff3 style instead, it is way too late for any option to \"git\nmerge\" to help you.\n\nBut having an option to \"git checkout\" lets you move forward from\nthat state, so it also makes 100% more sense than an option to \"git\nmerge\".\n\nSo, it is not odd at all. Just compare between merge and diff3,\nthink which one would often help you, configure to use it by default,\n*and* at a rare occasion where the chosen default does not work for\nyou, let \"checkout\" help you. The thing is, unless you first attempt\nto \"git merge\", you won't know what shape of conflict you would get,\nso you cannot choose the right conflict style command line option,\neven if one were available.\n"},{"id":"401984","messageId":"xmqqk0ytn208.fsf@gitster.c.googlers.com","threadId":"53898","inReplyTo":"20200723182549.GB3975154@coredump.intra.peff.net","subject":"Re: Improving merge of tricky conflicts","fromName":"Junio C Hamano","fromEmail":"gitster@pobox.com","sentAt":"2020-07-24T01:19:19Z","receivedAt":"2020-07-24T01:19:28Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"gitster@pobox.com","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/54884?v=4"},"body":"Jeff King writes:\n\n> sub flush {\n> print @ours;\n> print \"|||||||\\n\";\n> show_diff(base => \\@base, ours => \\@ours);\n> print \"|||||||\\n\";\n> show_diff(base => \\@base, theirs => \\@theirs);\n> print \"=======\\n\";\n\nBefore this gets called, \"<<<<<<<\\n\" from the original has been\nemitted to the output, so this shows\n\n\t<<<<<<<\n\tversion from ours\n\t|||||||\n\toutput from diff -u base ours\n\t|||||||\n\toutput from diff -u base theirs\n\t=======\n\tversion from theirs\n\n print @theirs;\n> @ours = @base = @theirs = ();\n> }\n\nUnfortunately, there is no \">>>>>>>\" shown with this code, as $_\nseems to get clobbered before the sub returns, so ...\n\n> sub state_theirs {\n> if (/^>{7}/) { flush(); print; $state = \\&state_none }\n> else { push @theirs, $_ }\n> }\n\n... that \"print\" does not do what we want it to do.\n\nLocalizing the $_ upfront in the show_diff sub should probably be\nsufficient. That is ...\n\n> sub show_diff {\n> my ($pre_name, $pre_data, $post_name, $post_data) = @_;\n\n+ local ($_);\n\n... here.\n\n>\n> my $pre = File::Temp->new;\n> print $pre @$pre_data;\n\nI am debating myself if I want to see the base version between these\ntwo extra diffs. Perhaps there is no need, as either one of these\ntwo extra diffs should be sufficient to see what was in the base\nversion.\n\nThanks.\n"},{"id":"401987","messageId":"CA+P7+xpPDu900dao08wfYtZ2pqU89D9vmwQPuFT-z5S5b-DXNA@mail.gmail.com","threadId":"53898","inReplyTo":"xmqqimedq5c8.fsf@gitster.c.googlers.com","subject":"Re: Improving merge of tricky conflicts","fromName":"Jacob Keller","fromEmail":"jacob.keller@gmail.com","sentAt":"2020-07-24T05:15:23Z","receivedAt":"2020-07-24T05:15:37Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"jacob.keller@gmail.com","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/874719?v=4"},"body":"On Thu, Jul 23, 2020 at 2:43 PM Junio C Hamano wrote:\n> If your merge used the merge (as opposed to diff3) style, and seeing\n> that the resulting conflict is not easy to review and you wish you\n> used diff3 style instead, it is way too late for any option to \"git\n> merge\" to help you.\n>\n> But having an option to \"git checkout\" lets you move forward from\n> that state, so it also makes 100% more sense than an option to \"git\n> merge\".\n>\n\nPerhaps the issue is just that it's not discoverable easily because\nit's a different command.\n"},{"id":"401988","messageId":"xmqqblk5moxx.fsf@gitster.c.googlers.com","threadId":"53898","inReplyTo":"CA+P7+xpPDu900dao08wfYtZ2pqU89D9vmwQPuFT-z5S5b-DXNA@mail.gmail.com","subject":"Re: Improving merge of tricky conflicts","fromName":"Junio C Hamano","fromEmail":"gitster@pobox.com","sentAt":"2020-07-24T06:01:30Z","receivedAt":"2020-07-24T06:01:36Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"gitster@pobox.com","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/54884?v=4"},"body":"Jacob Keller writes:\n\n> On Thu, Jul 23, 2020 at 2:43 PM Junio C Hamano wrote:\n>> If your merge used the merge (as opposed to diff3) style, and seeing\n>> that the resulting conflict is not easy to review and you wish you\n>> used diff3 style instead, it is way too late for any option to \"git\n>> merge\" to help you.\n>>\n>> But having an option to \"git checkout\" lets you move forward from\n>> that state, so it also makes 100% more sense than an option to \"git\n>> merge\".\n>\n> Perhaps the issue is just that it's not discoverable easily because\n> it's a different command.\n\nThat may be true.\n\nBy the way, \"git checkout --conflict=