Re: [PATCH 0/7] [doc] Add new page on merge conflicts
- From
Julia Evans <julia@jvns.ca>
- Date
- Oct 5, 2026, 18:49 UTC
- Message-ID
- <623cdf71-8076-4967-aff1-3ebeb57d1e3a@app.fastmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <CALnO6CC+h1y=Fu438nm4cd0K-dfPVYq9MqX_+k8fxBU60ot8KA@mail.gmail.com>
On Fri, Oct 2, 2026, at 10:29 PM, D. Ben Knoble wrote:
Show 27 quoted lines
> On Fri, Oct 2, 2026 at 1:40 PM Julia Evans <julia@jvns.ca> wrote: >> >> Thanks for the review! >> >> >> * I wrote that git commit does the same thing as git merge --continue >> >> during a git merge , but I'm not sure if that's always true. >> > >> > See also discussion in >> > https://lore.kernel.org/git/CABPp-BEQSx4m3BcT28CpVGCtsH75+x3gmv4OJz_ecLVLx+kBWg@mail.gmail.com/T/#t >> >> Wow, that's a very interesting read. I'm more informed than I was before >> I read it but also at the same time more confused :). It makes me think >> that "git commit does the same thing as git merge --continue" is maybe >> not true but also I don't know what the difference might be. >> >> I've put an item on my TODO list to remove >> `git commit does the same thing as git merge --continue`" and to try to >> replace it with a more vague sentence that I guess says you can use >> either command without being so specific on whether they are exactly >> the same. > > For now I would say the subtleties in that conversation really make me > lean towards the following: > > - "git <thing> --continue" is, for most users in most cases, the right > thing to do. It's what "git status" recommends and will practically > never do anything surprising (?).
I was actually surprised to discover that `git status` does not recommend `git merge --continue`: it recommends `git commit`. Maybe we should change that though?
I agree it makes sense to be consistent with what `git status` recommends.
Show 8 quoted lines
> - However, it may not always be exactly what you *want*---and you'll > usually know when you want to go "outside" the normal sequencer and > commit directly (because you'll have understood some nuanced details > about what can happen). > > For merge it may be the case that they're the same, I suppose (I'm > genuinely not sure), but I would prefer to simplify folks' paths by > recommending one of the few uniform interfaces we have :)
The only other thing that gives me pause about recommending folks `git merge --continue` too strongly is that as we know Git users are slow to change their habits, and we don't want to confuse anyone. If someone is currently using `git commit` I want to know that they can keep doing it the same way with no worries.
Maybe if we change `git status` to recommend `git merge --continue`, and we think there are no real advantages to using `git commit` instead of `git merge --continue`, then we could say something like this:
NOTE: `git commit` is an older alternative to `git merge --continue`. You can use either one after resolving a `git merge`.