From: Phil Hord <hordp@cisco.com>
Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2012 22:51:54 GMT
Subject: Re: rerere.autoupdate that wouldn't
Message-ID: <4F5A898A.2060701@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <7vd38l4cl5.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>

Writ Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>,
> Phil Hord <hordp@cisco.com> writes:
> 
>> Is this what is supposed to happen?  Should I look into adding
>> 'rerere.autoContinue=true'?
> 
> "Yes", and "Perhaps, but there may be a better alternative".
> 
> Whatever rerere did, "git merge", "git am", and friends should
> report the fact that the result is not just a trivial conflict-free
> merge, so that the user can take an appropriate action.  Otherwise
> you will be robbing the last chance to eyeball the result from
> people who have been using rerere.autoupdate=true and doing so
> before committing.
> 
> And a better alternative to make "rerere.autoupdate" stronger may be
> to make the variable tri-valued, instead of adding a new variable
> that does not make any sense when rerere.autoupdate is not set.

Any preference on the third option-name?

I think  'False || True || Continue'

Phil