From: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Date: Mon, 07 Nov 2005 02:01:28 GMT
Subject: Re: Expected Behavior?
Message-ID: <7vd5ldusg7.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>
In-Reply-To: <E1EYsny-0004hq-IW@jdl.com>

Jon Loeliger <jdl@freescale.com> writes:

>     git checkout -b dev
>
>     echo "More for file1" >> file1
>     rm -f file2
>     echo "Another file!" > file3
>
>     git update-index file1
>     git update-index --force-remove file2
>     git add file3

You do not have file2 in the working tree, so regular --remove
would do.

	git-update-index --add --remove file1 file2 file3

>     git merge "Grab dev stuff" master dev

This is good.  We used to use (and the tutorial only talks
about) git-resolve to do this step, like this:

	git-resolve master dev 'Merge dev branch'

And I've kept using git-resolve myself; not that I do not trust
git-merge but purely from inertia, although I was the one who
did 'git merge' ;-).  Maybe I should first update the tutorial
to use git-merge instead of git-resolve.

It appears that as the everyday workhorse, using Daniel's
git-merge-resolve is stable through git-merge have proven stable
enough.  So here is a question.  Do people mind if 'git-resolve'
and 'git-octopus' are dropped before 1.0?  This means 2 less
programs in your /usr/bin ;-).