Re: [PATCH 00/48] Handling more corner cases in merge-recursive.c

> Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> It does sound potentially expensive, though, and might mean a lot
>> more work in merge-recursive to handle that extra information.  Is that a
>> path we want to take at some point?
>
> Probably you can start with backend specific option (e.g. -Xbreak=yes) to
> experiment. We made recursive the default not because it deals with
> renames (in a broken way) but primarily because it handles criss-cross
> better; at some point we might also want to add another backend specific
> option (e.g. -Xrename=off) to allow the users to keep the "recursive"
> aspect of the strategy while declining a more expensive (and brittle)
> rename handling to take effect.
>
> My gut feeling is that -Xbreak=yes, once the code does work well enough,
> would have to become the default. It would make the default mode of merge
> possibly quite expensive but it is Ok as long as we give projects with
> simple/clean history an easy way to use either "recursive -Xrename=off" or
> even "resolve" to avoid cost that is unnecessary to handle their needs.