configure remote/local as mine/theirs

> the git documentation is so clear withcalling changes "mine" or
> "theirs". when configuring a mergetool e.g. kdiff3, and doing a
> rebase, these names are not used. instead it is "local", which
> is theirs in the rebase case, and remote, which is mine. not
> that this is rocket science, and i understand the technical
> reason why the names are like this. but anyway i get a nod in
> my brain about it sometimes. can i somehow configure git so it
> would use "mine" and "theirs" only?

> Am 11.04.20 um 14:51 schrieb rupert THURNER:
>> the git documentation is so clear withcalling changes "mine" or
>> "theirs". when configuring a mergetool e.g. kdiff3, and doing a
>> rebase, these names are not used. instead it is "local", which
>> is theirs in the rebase case, and remote, which is mine. not
>> that this is rocket science, and i understand the technical
>> reason why the names are like this. but anyway i get a nod in
>> my brain about it sometimes. can i somehow configure git so it
>> would use "mine" and "theirs" only?
> The words "mine" (actually "ours") and "theirs" have a very precise
> meaning in Git. If you were to use these meanings during a rebase, you
> would not like the result: it would call "ours" what you intend to call
> "theirs", and vice versa.
>
> Consider this history:
>
>
> --a--b--c--d   <-- upstream ("theirs" from your point of view)
>    \
>     x--y--z    <-- branch to rebase ("mine/ours" from your POV)
>
> During a rebase, Git is "positioned" on the history following commit d,
> i.e. on "their" branch. Then it cherry-picks commits x, y, and z. In
> that situation, the change that you consider "theirs" is actually "ours"
> from Git's point of view, and your own change (those introduced by x, y,
> and z) are "theirs" from Git's point of view.
>
> I suggest you live with "local" and "remote" for a bit less confusion.

> On 11/04/2020 22:40, Johannes Sixt wrote:
> > Am 11.04.20 um 14:51 schrieb rupert THURNER:
> >> my brain about it sometimes. can i somehow configure git so it
> >> would use "mine" and "theirs" only?
> > The words "mine" (actually "ours") and "theirs" have a very precise
> > meaning in Git. If you were to use these meanings during a rebase, you
> > would not like the result: it would call "ours" what you intend to call
> > "theirs", and vice versa.
> >
> > Consider this history:
> >
> >
> > --a--b--c--d   <-- upstream ("theirs" from your point of view)
> >    \
> >     x--y--z    <-- branch to rebase ("mine/ours" from your POV)
> >
> > During a rebase, Git is "positioned" on the history following commit d,
> > i.e. on "their" branch. Then it cherry-picks commits x, y, and z. In
> > that situation, the change that you consider "theirs" is actually "ours"
> > from Git's point of view, and your own change (those introduced by x, y,
> > and z) are "theirs" from Git's point of view.

> given the way Git is using it's terminology, would you have any
> suggestions as to how the man page(s) could now be _clarified_ so as to
> avoid these potential misunderstandings? Even perhaps
>     "theirs", "ours", "local" and "remote" are distinct terms in Git
> with different meanings as detailed in gitreference/glossary.   (or some
> such - though 3/4 are not in the glossary!)