Re: Opinions on changing add/add conflict resolution?

From: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>
Date: Mar 12, 2018, 23:14 UTC
Message-ID: <20180312231419.GA235366@aiede.svl.corp.google.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAE1pOi3jbLyZ7zgCO5J_BrQurrxZvm5RH+ZjXTTBf4MMmVOduA@mail.gmail.com>

Hi,

Hilco Wijbenga wrote:

> On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 2:35 PM, Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com> wrote:

Show 10 quoted lines

>> Interesting.  I would be tempted to resolve this inconsistency the
>> other way: by doing a half-hearted two-way merge (e.g. by picking one
>> of the two versions of the colliding file) and marking the path as
>> conflicted in the index.  That way it's more similar to edit/edit,
>> too.
>
> If work is going to be done in this area, would it be possible to
> include making auto-merging (in general) optional? Preferably,
> configurable by file (or glob) but I'd already be happy with a global
> setting to opt out.

Have you experimented with the 'merge' attribute (see "git help attributes")? E.g. you can put

 * -merge

in .gitattributes or .git/info/attributes.

If that helps, then a patch adding a pointer to the most helpful place (maybe git-merge.txt?) would be very welcome.

Thanks and hope that helps, Jonathan