Re: [RFC/PATCH] mergetool: clarify local/remote terminology

From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Date: Feb 28, 2008, 08:43 UTC
Message-ID: <20080228084328.GA18350@coredump.intra.peff.net>
In-Reply-To: <20080225184648.GC15131@sigill.intra.peff.net>

On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 01:46:48PM -0500, Jeff King wrote:

Show 7 quoted lines

> > On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 12:12 AM, Jay Soffian <jaysoffian@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Always calling the thing on the left-side of a merge "local" and on the
> > >  right side "remote" isn't correct. You could be rebasing, in which case
> > >  the left side is the new base/upstream and the right side is the saved
> > >  commits which are being re-applied. So,
> 
> I'll try out your patch and comment next time I use it.

I finally got a chance to use this today (hey, I don't get a lot of conflicts!).

I like it; I think it made it a lot more obvious which side was which during the rebase. I checked with cherry-pick, as well; it more or less makes sense, except that the cherry-picked commit is called "upstream." Which sort of makes sense, but it would be nice to call it something more obvious. Unfortunately I'm not sure that there is a good way to determine we are in a failed cherry-pick (probably a failed 'revert' is in a similar situation).

So like I said before, I think the eventual "right" thing is to have a more verbose status file. But in the meantime, I think this patch is sensible.

-Peff