From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2007 06:30:19 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Document what the stage numbers in the :$n:path syntax mean.
Message-ID: <7vveba90qs.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org>
In-Reply-To: <20070820060522.GA27913@spearce.org>

"Shawn O. Pearce" <spearce@spearce.org> writes:

>> Am I the only one who messes this up? If not, patch is below.
>
> Maybe.  ;-)
>
> I've memorized it long long ago.  But my coworkers haven't and always
> get it wrong, and look at me funny when I tell them "trust me, your
> data is in stage 2 and theirs is in stage 3...  because that's the
> convention all of the tools you are using follows".

I am not _opposed_ to :ours:$path syntax, but I suspect there is
something else that is wrong if you need to use :$n:$path syntax
that often.

I have never been in a situation I had to say :base:$path,
unless I am debugging the merge driver.  So it is between :ours:$path
and :theirs:$path.

But aren't they by definition HEAD:$path and MERGE_HEAD:$path,
which are far more descriptive?