From: Jakub Narebski Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2008 20:27:15 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Respecting core.autocrlf when showing objects Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <20080612195553.GK13626@fieldses.org> "J. Bruce Fields" writes: > (Is there any advantage, then, to the :n:filename syntax to a user? > Is it useful in any cases when they couldn't use HEAD or MERGE_HEAD > instead? If not I might be tempted to cut this bit entirely (or > postpone it till later.) I'm not sure, but I think that while HEAD and MERGE_HEAD vs :n: differ in the tree represented (in the index trivial / tree conflicts are resolved) they have the same file contents for conflicting files. I think that :n: syntax is just shorter, especially for the ancestor (c.f. $(git merge-base HEAD MERGE_HEAD)). And of course there is octopus merge to be considered... -- Jakub Narebski Poland ShadeHawk on #git