Re: [RFC 0/3] Make git more user-friendly during a merge conflict

From: David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org>
Date: Feb 28, 2014, 17:33 UTC
Message-ID: <87eh2n16sw.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org>
In-Reply-To: <85zjlb1740.fsf@stephe-leake.org>

Stephen Leake <stephen_leake@stephe-leake.org> writes:

Show 19 quoted lines

> David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> writes:
>
>> Stephen Leake <stephen_leake@stephe-leake.org> writes:
>>
>>> David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> writes:
>>>
>>>> "do the right thing" commands also tend to do the wrong thing
>>>> occasionally with potentially disastrous results when they are used
>>>> in scripts where the followup actions rely on the actual result.
>>>
>>> That is bad, and should not be allowed. On the other hand, I have yet
>>> to see an actual use case of bad behavior in this discussion.
>>
>> Huh.
>>
>> <http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/242744>
>
> That's about backward incompatibility, which is bad, but not what I was
> talking about above.

No, it isn't.  I quote:

    I sometimes run "git reset" during a merge to only reset the index
    and then examine the changes introduced by the merge. With your
    changes, someone doing so would abort the merge and discard the
    merge resolution.  I very rarely do this, but even rarely, I
    wouldn't like Git to start droping data silently for me ;-).

You should not make statements like "I have yet to see an actual use case of bad behavior in this discussion" when you actually mean "I have not yet seen anything I would be interested in doing myself".

-- 
David Kastrup