Re: Collaborative conflict resolution feature request

From: Christian Couder <christian.couder@gmail.com>
Date: Jun 20, 2020, 16:09 UTC
Message-ID: <CAP8UFD2t6OVFWjm76oy=+Fgo1UUepwHTpOWM8vmCYzs9hSy_ug@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <BY5PR19MB34000FB239B2B7BD996A17C790980@BY5PR19MB3400.namprd19.prod.outlook.com>

On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 11:17 AM Curtin, Eric <Eric.Curtin@dell.com> wrote:

Show 15 quoted lines

> Would it be reasonable if anyone could push a partial resolution but the book
> stops there (once a user hits a conflict of a conflict is must be solved
> locally)? I agree it doesn't make sense in most cases to support pushing
> recursive conflict resolutions (even though the other part of me says if the
> users wants to go down that path why stop them? You could even have a config
> setting to allow N levels of conflicts to be pushed, the default setting being
> exactly the way things are, none or 0!).
>
> I know in my project we already "fake" this functionality like pointed out in
> the first email, it's just unclean the way we do it, leaves broken commits
> in the repo, you can no longer use difftools, etc.
>
> Should I even consider this as a research idea for my thesis? Or another way
> of wording this is, if someone sent the code to the git maintainers Junio, etc.
> would it be merged into git?

I think it could be an interesting feature to add to Git, as I agree that some people often have this kind of issues with conflicts.

What could perhaps work is to develop a new command, maybe called `git conflict` with subcommands for example to load, save and maybe push, fetch and resolve partial resolutions of conflicts. The conflicts could perhaps be stored as commits in the "refs/conflicts/" ref namespace.