From: Junio C Hamano Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2026 21:53:16 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] merge-file: honor merge.conflictStyle outside of a repository Message-ID: In-Reply-To: Yannik Tausch writes: >> Junio C Hamano wrote: > >> Wouldn't it suffice to unconditionally execute the body of the if >> (startup_info->have_repository) block to pass "repo" we obtained >> from the caller to repo_config() instead of the_repository? The >> caller of this function passes us either the_repository or NULL and >> repo_config() does the very-early thing when passed NULL as the >> repo, signalling that we are outside a repository. > > Jup, looks like I missed that. Implemented your suggestion! > ... > Done! > > Here is the new patch: > > From 9fa437c70bfd328cfdfe9cfca982b49b70ad033f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: Yannik Tausch > Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2026 21:09:52 +0100 > Subject: [PATCH v2] merge-file: honor merge.conflictStyle outside of a > repository Please do not send patches this way. Giving responses to review comments is very good and strongly encouraged, but stop the response message with "a new version of the patch coming!" and have a separate message for the patch itself. It sometimes is done to interject a sample patch in the middle of a discussion, but then the convention is ... continuation of an existing discussion ... So, how about doing things this way? --- >8 --- Subject: the title of the patch The proposed log message for the commit comes here Signed-off-by: you --- ... notes, diffstat, diff ... i.e., use a scissors line to tell the receiving end that the rest of the message is a patch message, and override the Subject: with an in-body header. Omit the (From Mon Sep 17 2001) "magic" line, "From:" and "Date:". The last two can be taken from the e-mail message anyway.