Re: Effective difference between git-rebase and git-resolve
- From
- Mark Wooding <mdw@distorted.org.uk>
- Date
- Mar 25, 2006, 11:08 UTC
- Message-ID
- <slrne2a94r.cp6.mdw@metalzone.distorted.org.uk>
- In-Reply-To
- <Pine.LNX.4.63.0603251034550.14457@wbgn013.biozentrum.uni-wuerzburg.de>
Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> wrote:
> I am nowhere near kernel people, but I am using git on a machine where it > is too cumbersome to install python. If git-resolve goes, I am without a > merge strategy (at least until git-recursive is ported to C... was that > not the plan with git-merge-tree? What happened on that front?).
Err... git-resolve isn't the same as git-merge-resolve. The latter is a stupid merge strategy which fits into the git-merge/git-pull infrastructure. The former is a different program which does merges badly, and you didn't want to use it even if you don't have Python!
I'd forgotten all about git-resolve until it got mentioned just now.
-- [mdw]