# Re: cg-merge should use git-merge 4 messages from 2005-10-17 to 2005-10-20. Participants: Junio C Hamano, Martin Langhoff. Thread: https://gitlist.dev/t/2122 ## Junio C Hamano, 2005-10-17 08:31 Subject: Re: cg-merge should use git-merge Message-ID: <7vzmp81r4n.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/7vzmp81r4n.fsf%40assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net In-Reply-To: <46a038f90510161744m7e95303eu8a9942363ffc58a6@mail.gmail.com> ``` Martin Langhoff writes: > - Junio, would you tolerate a flag for git-merge that says "don't > autocommit even on cleanly merged"? I'd *welcome* not just tolerate. Currently both git-am and git-applypatch call git-merge-resolve directly, but they should really be calling git-merge with user supplied strategy with '-s' parameter. By bypassing git-merge, they happen to get the "do not commit when you fall back on 3-way merge" semantics, but that is just by accident. I have a plan to rewrite git-cherry-pick using git-format-patch piped into git-am (I have not scripted it, but that is the primary way I do cherry-picks these days), and being able to customize what happens after merge by git-merge would probably be useful there as well. ``` ## Junio C Hamano, 2005-10-17 09:26 Subject: Re: cg-merge should use git-merge Message-ID: <7vach81olt.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/7vach81olt.fsf%40assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net In-Reply-To: <46a038f90510170203ndee2b2bi913b62014614f68e@mail.gmail.com> ``` Martin Langhoff writes: > Something like a manual merge that I could force to happen on command > > git-doarbitrarymergeontree -r fromtree:totree [ victimtree ] > That essentially is a simple one-liner: git-read-tree -m -u fromtree HEAD totree which is more or less what git-cherry-pick and git-revert do, except fromtree always is totree^ in git-cherry-pick. ``` ## Martin Langhoff, 2005-10-19 11:21 Subject: Fwd: cg-merge should use git-merge Message-ID: <46a038f90510190421l50b2c12k495db23b62015782@mail.gmail.com> URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/46a038f90510190421l50b2c12k495db23b62015782%40mail.gmail.com In-Reply-To: <46a038f90510161644l35119401rdc05c081506ae715@mail.gmail.com> ``` Resending a post that never made it to the list due to a bug at my end, and I think warrants some more discussion. Unfortunately, I'm bug-fixing at the moment, so implementing this has taken a backseat. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Martin Langhoff Date: Oct 17, 2005 12:44 PM Subject: cg-merge should use git-merge To: Petr Baudis , Git Mailing List Petr, After using git-merge a few times by hand to test-drive the new merge drivers, I'm sold on the idea, and I 'd like to have cg-merge use git-merge directly. I'll try and find the time one of these evenings to outline something, but I guess it's pretty core to Cogito, so I'm after some direction from you ;) martin ``` ## Martin Langhoff, 2005-10-20 07:04 Subject: Re: cg-merge should use git-merge Message-ID: <46a038f90510200004l67e2d19kf8e9a4c6190f44f@mail.gmail.com> URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/46a038f90510200004l67e2d19kf8e9a4c6190f44f%40mail.gmail.com In-Reply-To: <46a038f90510190421l50b2c12k495db23b62015782@mail.gmail.com> ``` On 10/20/05, Martin Langhoff wrote: > After using git-merge a few times by hand to test-drive the new merge > drivers, I'm sold on the idea, and I 'd like to have cg-merge use > git-merge directly. I started drafting a 5-minute proof-of-concept, and then it struck me: cg users aren't aware of the index. This is really important when you are merging and have to resolve a conflict over a dirty tree. git users know that the "clean" part of the merge is in the index, and they have to resolve a couple of files in their checkout, and update the index for those only before calling git-write-tree & git-commit-tree. Cogito users don't know about this magic at all, which is a bit of a problem. I can refuse to run cg-merge on a dirty tree to make things simpler, but that's cheating ;-) tagging "for later"... cheers, martin ```