Re: [PATCH 0/3] detecting delete/modechange conflicts

From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Date: Oct 26, 2015, 21:54 UTC
Message-ID: <20151026215406.GB17419@sigill.intra.peff.net>
In-Reply-To: <xmqq8u6pfgl9.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>

On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 02:46:42PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:

Show 14 quoted lines

> > After looking through the history and the list archive, I don't _think_
> > this was intentional, and we simply missed the case in both places. But
> > maybe somebody else knows something I don't. It seems like we should be
> > punting to the user under the general principle of stupid and safe
> > merges.
> 
> Yes, I do not recall ever discussing and agreeing with Linus that we
> should resolve to deletion over mode change, and I agree that it
> would be very likely that this never came up in practice simply
> because in real life removal is already rare, mode change is rarer,
> and these happening to the same path in the same timeperiod to
> matter in merges is even more rare.
> 
> We should definitely signal a conflict.

Thanks, that matches my thinking exactly.

BTW, this came up because libgit2 does signal the conflict, and we are regression-testing a switch from merge-resolve over to libgit2 to power GitHub's "merge" button. Run it on enough test cases and you will find one of everything. :)

-Peff