From: Johannes Sixt Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2008 07:39:43 GMT Subject: Re: Merge-Recursive Improvements Message-ID: <47B29EBF.7060607@viscovery.net> In-Reply-To: Voltage Spike schrieb: > 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