From: Junio C Hamano Date: Thu, 14 May 2009 04:42:19 GMT Subject: Re: [Q] merge squash unexpected conflicts Message-ID: <7veiusz45w.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> In-Reply-To: Cory Sharp writes: > On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 8:21 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > .. >> Of course. That's the whole point of recording a merge as a merge. >> > > $ git help merge > > --squash > Produce the working tree and index state as if a real merge > happened. ... This allows you to create a > single commit on top of the current branch whose effect is > the same as merging another branch. What's your point? WIth --squash, the tree and the index state becomes the same as if a real merge happened. But the merge history is discarded with --squash. It is a simulation of a merge in CVS and SVN (before they added "merge tracking"). If you want support for repeated merges by merge tracking, you do not want todiscard the merge history by using --squash.