From: Martin Langhoff <martin.langhoff@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 04 Mar 2007 21:59:33 GMT
Subject: Re: Conflict editing
Message-ID: <46a038f90703041359w3cf5ff14n85445396c0ffc422@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20070304181044.GC8560@thunk.org>

On 3/5/07, Theodore Tso <tytso@mit.edu> wrote:
> It currently uses a hard-wired preference order for the GUI merge
> tools, based on the current functionality of said merge tools, but the
> plan is to add options parsing and a config option to allow a
> user-specified override.
>
> Any comments, suggestions?

I find xxdiff much better than meld, tkdiff and kdiff -- but maybe I
just don't know how to use them, or they have gotten better in the
last few months.

I had written (and posted) a git-xxdiff earlier. A (minor) concern is
that from a packaging and dependencies perspective, the packager has
to suggest *all* of them, and still a default install may not work at
all -- it might be a good idea to suggest what to install in the error
message. Or depend on all of them (yuck!).

One thing I _don't_ want as a user is to see the graphical mergers
starting by default. Most merges are trivial, and I can just edit them
in emacs or vi.

And when a merge is really hard, and calls for merge-centric tools, I
open gitk alongside to see what commits happened on each side.

cheers,


martin