Re: Merge-Recursive Improvements
- From
Johannes Sixt <j.sixt@viscovery.net>
- Date
- Feb 13, 2008, 07:39 UTC
- Message-ID
- <47B29EBF.7060607@viscovery.net>
- In-Reply-To
- <A21B3CA8-6240-434F-87A9-C6F76DA15265@gmail.com>
Voltage Spike schrieb:
Show 7 quoted lines
> Third, git doesn't appear to have any sense of context when performing a > merge. Another contrived example which wouldn't be flagged as a merge > conflict: > > ptr = malloc(len); // Added in HEAD. > init(); // Included in merge-base. > ptr = malloc(len); // Added in "merge".
You seem to say that you want this to result in a merge conflict.
I'm opposed to this: It means that you would mark a conflict if there is a single unchanged line between the two changes that come from the merged branches. So far it has happened for me much more frequently that such merges were correct, and I should not be bothered with conflict markers. I conciously prefer to pay the price that such a merge is incorrect on occasion.
You also need to draw a border line: a single unchanged line between the changes? Or better also conflict at 2 lines? Or 3?
-- Hannes