Re: [PATCH 3/5] git-merge.txt: modernize word choice in "True merge" section
- From
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
- Date
- Apr 14, 2023, 20:36 UTC
- Message-ID
- <xmqqr0smp5ft.fsf@gitster.g>
- In-Reply-To
- <62b68829c5aeaa28a79192b55058e87a0ef72816.1681495119.git.gitgitgadget@gmail.com>
"Philippe Blain via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@gmail.com> writes:
Show 11 quoted lines
> From: Philippe Blain <levraiphilippeblain@gmail.com> > > The "True merge" section of the 'git merge' documentation mentions that > in case of conflicts, the conflicted working tree files contain "the > result of the "merge" program". This probably refers to RCS' 'merge' > program, which is mentioned further down under "How conflicts are > presented". > > Since it is not clear at that point of the document which program is > referred to, and since most modern readers probably do not relate to RCS > anyway, let's just write "the merge operation" instead.
Good.
I suspect that the original refers literally to the RCS's merge program. Until caba139d (Use git-merge-file in git-merge-one-file, too, 2006-12-22) switched to use our poor-man's substitute for "merge", we used to invoke "merge" for three-way merge.
We no longer do, and a more generic "merge operation" is certainly a lot more appropriate in today's world.
> can inspect the stages with `git ls-files -u`). The working > - tree files contain the result of the "merge" program; i.e. 3-way > + tree files contain the result of the merge operation; i.e. 3-way > merge results with familiar conflict markers `<<<` `===` `>>>`.