git/list[1] front-page[2] threads[3] people[4] search[5] about
 

Re: git-mergetool: wrap tools with 3 files only to use the BASE file instead of MERGED

From
David Aguilar <davvid@gmail.com>
Date
Aug 11, 2011, 08:38 UTC
Message-ID
<20110811083835.GA29507@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To
<20110810161211.GC4076@elie.gateway.2wire.net>
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 11:12:11AM -0500, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
Show 33 quoted lines
> (+cc: some relevant people)
> Hi,
> 
> Tanguy Ortolo wrote[1]:
> 
> > git-mergetool ideally uses tools that work with 4 files: BASE, LOCAL,
> > REMOTE, which are the usual original and two new version of the file,
> > and MERGED, which is where the tool is supposed to write the result of
> > the merge.
> >
> > The problem is that most tools, at least graphical ones, specifically
> > meld, can only work with three files, as they save the result to the
> > original file.
> >
> > git-mergetool currently handles this situation by passing MERGED LOCAL
> > REMOTE to the tool. This could be fine, but unfortunately MERGE contains
> > the conflicts, formatted for manual resolution, so it is not really
> > appropriate as an original file.
> >
> > I think it would be better to wrap such merge tools by:
> > 1. passing them BASE LOCAL REMOTE;
> > 2. checking whether or not BASE hase been modified:
> >    * if it has, then copying it to MERGED,
> >    * if it has not, exiting with return code 1 (merge failed).
> > This check can be by either saving and comparing the mdate, or perhaps
> > the SHA-1 hash of the BASE file.
> >
> > If this sounds good enough, I can dive into git-mergetoo--lib and
> > implement it. In the meantime, here is an example of a custom merge tool
> > that wraps meld for that purpose.
> 
> I think you forgot to include the example.  Anyway, at first glance it
> sounds like a sensible idea.  David et al: thoughts?

I think it sounds like a good thing for certain tools. Sebastian mentioned it being fine in ecmerge and bc3. xxdiff also lets you specify the output file, so it probably wouldn't need it either, I think.

If the patch touches individual tools that need it, e.g. meld, I say go for it.

> Regards,
> Jonathan
> 
> [1] http://bugs.debian.org/637355
cheers,
-- 
					David
Previous: Sebastian SchuberthNext: Jonathan Nieder
Message 4 of 7 in “Re: git-mergetool: wrap tools with 3 files only to use the BASE file instead of MERGED”
  1. Jonathan NiederAug 10, 2011
  2. Tanguy OrtoloAug 10, 2011
  3. Sebastian SchuberthAug 10, 2011
  4. David AguilarAug 11, 2011
  5. Jonathan NiederAug 11, 2011
  6. David AguilarAug 11, 2011
  7. Sebastian SchuberthAug 11, 2011

Read the whole thread, see it on lore, or plain text.

$ cat FOOTERMessages come from the public archive at lore.kernel.org/git, fetched every hour. The front page is chosen and written each morning by an AI editor and can be wrong; the threads themselves are the record. About and API. For agents: an MCP server at https://gitlist.dev/mcp, and any thread, story or person page as Markdown by adding .md to its URL (or sending Accept: text/markdown). Details in /llms.txt.