From: Shawn Pearce Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2006 21:53:32 GMT Subject: Re: git and bzr Message-ID: <20061128215332.GK28337@spearce.org> In-Reply-To: Linus Torvalds wrote: > There are lots of reasons why "git status" may tell you that something > isn't merged. The most common one by far being an actual data conflict, > not a name conflict. The reason for why something conflicts is always told > at merge-time. Except when you are doing a large merge, your terminal scrollback is really short, and there's a lot of conflicts. Then you can't see what merge said about any given file. :-( Fortunately its easy to back out of the merge and redo it with large enough scrollback, or redirecting it to a file for later review, but its annoying that we don't save that information off for later review. --