From: Richard Hartmann <richih.mailinglist@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2008 09:32:29 GMT
Subject: Re: commiting while the current version is in conflict
Message-ID: <2d460de70810170232o24fcd1d4pd1c7a7503e17b02@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <7vwsg7mxb6.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org>

On Fri, Oct 17, 2008 at 10:37, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:

> Eh, Sorry about that --- I did not mean "ignorant" in that sense.  Perhaps
> replacing the word with "unfortunate" would sound nicer?

A lot yes. No harm done, apologies for picking the bad interpretation
of ignorant.


> Don't you realize that is what the hook is doing already?  After making
> such an error, the definitive information is lost, because the user told
> the tool that the resolution is done and the file is ready to be
> committed) by mistake.  Even then the hook is trying its best to help the
> user.

You misunderstood me, there. I was thinking about the pre-add hook
while writing the above. Doing anything at commit time is obviously
wrong.


> As to pre-add hook, I am not enthused, but if somebody sends in a clean
> patch, I wouldn't be opposed to it at least in principle.

An implicit need for it does apparently exist. Else, the default hook for
pre-commit would not need to check for conflicts.


Richard