From: Johannes Schindelin Date: Sun, 08 Jul 2007 12:53:03 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH] merge-tree: sometimes, d/f conflict is not an issue Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <7v644v5tr3.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> Hi, On Sat, 7 Jul 2007, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Johannes Schindelin writes: > > >> IOW, don't make unpack-trees to make policy decisions on final > >> resolution, unless it is operating under aggressive rule (where the > >> caller explicitly allows it to make more than the "trivial" decisions). > >> The caller (in this case, merge-recursive) should see A at stage #2 with > >> A/B at stages #1 and #3 and decide what to do. > > > > Okay, so you're saying that merge-recursive should use the aggressive > > strategy? > > I do not think so. Yes, I realized that by running the tests with it. A rename A->B in one, and A->C in the other branch will go undetected. I should have written this into my mail posting the WIP patch, but frankly, I was too tired. Ciao, Dscho