git/list[1] front-page[2] threads[3] people[4] search[5] about
 

Re: [PATCH] merge-recursive: mark rename/delete conflict as unmerged

From
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date
Dec 22, 2008, 23:12 UTC
Message-ID
<7v7i5rhkix.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org>
In-Reply-To
<alpine.DEB.1.00.0812222308410.30769@pacific.mpi-cbg.de>
Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> writes:
> When a file was renamed in one branch, but deleted in the other, one
> should expect the index to contain an unmerged entry, namely the
> target of the rename.  Make it so.

That was quick, but the surrounding code makes me wonder if other if/elseif branches also need similar handling.

For example, rename/add comes up with a new name that does not exist anywhere, and adds both to the index; it is understandable that you need to do this when processing a merge with non-zero depth because you need to have a tree as the result, but shouldn't the final zero depth merge just use the original names and leave the results in higher stages?

Previous: Johannes SchindelinNext: Johannes Schindelin
Message 4 of 5 in “Move-delete merge conflict is not displayed using git ls-files --unmerged”
  1. Constantine PlotnikovDec 22, 2008
  2. Junio C HamanoDec 22, 2008
  3. merge-recursive: mark rename/delete conflict as unmergedJohannes Schindelin, Dec 22, 2008
  4. Junio C HamanoDec 22, 2008
  5. Johannes SchindelinDec 23, 2008

Read the whole thread, see it on lore, or plain text.

$ cat FOOTERMessages come from the public archive at lore.kernel.org/git, fetched every hour. The front page is chosen and written each morning by an AI editor and can be wrong; the threads themselves are the record. About and API. For agents: an MCP server at https://gitlist.dev/mcp, and any thread, story or person page as Markdown by adding .md to its URL (or sending Accept: text/markdown). Details in /llms.txt.