Re: [PATCH] modify/delete conflict resolution overwrites untracked file

From: Mike Ralphson <mike.ralphson@gmail.com>
Date: Dec 15, 2008, 11:45 UTC
Message-ID: <e2b179460812150345i29222edesc64f544a9e4db42c@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.1.00.0812151206360.30933@intel-tinevez-2-302>

2008/12/15 Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>:

Show 10 quoted lines

> On Mon, 15 Dec 2008, Mike Ralphson wrote:
>> I wonder if another approach is workable... to read 'vulnerable'
>> untracked working tree files into a new (temporary, uncommittable) stage
>> in the index, perform whatever merging is required, then reinstate all
>> entries from the new stage.
>
> I think the solution is not in making things more complicated, but
> simpler.  I agree with Junio that the recursive merge needs a major
> rewrite which respects d/f conflicts and renames in the _design_, not as
> an afterthought.

Yes, it might also score low on not surprising the user. I bow to more experienced heads on matters of clean design and merge strategies.

> Besides, I really do not want untracked files to be inserted into a stage.
> Remember, adding something to the index means to hash it, and I do have
> half-a-gigabyte untracked data in some of my worktrees.

Granted, but here we are only talking about files (or clashing file-names) which someone [else] has already added/removed/modified in another branch etc.

Mike