From: Junio C Hamano Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2009 18:05:11 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] merge-recursive: point the user to commit when file would be overwritten. Message-ID: <7vskc9vzqg.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> In-Reply-To: <1258732767-12741-2-git-send-email-Matthieu.Moy@imag.fr> Matthieu Moy writes: > The commit-before-pull is well accepted in the DVCS community, but is > confusing some new users. This should get them back in the right way when > the problem occurs. > > Signed-off-by: Matthieu Moy Don't these extra lines warrant "advice.*" option? > --- > merge-recursive.c | 6 ++++-- > 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/merge-recursive.c b/merge-recursive.c > index f55b7eb..d5e0819 100644 > --- a/merge-recursive.c > +++ b/merge-recursive.c > @@ -172,9 +172,11 @@ static int git_merge_trees(int index_only, > struct unpack_trees_options opts; > static const struct unpack_trees_error_msgs msgs = { > /* would_overwrite */ > - "Your local changes to '%s' would be overwritten by merge. Aborting.", > + "Your local changes to '%s' would be overwritten by merge. Aborting:\n" > + "Please, commit your changes or stash them before you can merge.", > /* not_uptodate_file */ > - "Your local changes to '%s' would be overwritten by merge. Aborting.", > + "Your local changes to '%s' would be overwritten by merge. Aborting:\n" > + "Please, commit your changes or stash them before you can merge.", > /* not_uptodate_dir */ > "Updating '%s' would lose untracked files in it. Aborting.", > /* would_lose_untracked */ > -- > 1.6.5.3.435.g5f2e3.dirty