From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS3215 2.6.0.0/16 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.5 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_MED, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from out1.vger.email (out1.vger.email [IPv6:2620:137:e000::1:20]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 32FFC1F4D7 for ; Wed, 8 Jun 2022 18:01:19 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: dcvr.yhbt.net; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=google.com header.i=@google.com header.b="OdfUdYgl"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S233617AbiFHSBQ (ORCPT ); Wed, 8 Jun 2022 14:01:16 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:55918 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S233513AbiFHSBO (ORCPT ); Wed, 8 Jun 2022 14:01:14 -0400 Received: from mail-ot1-x335.google.com (mail-ot1-x335.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::335]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D93041CBD2D for ; Wed, 8 Jun 2022 11:01:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ot1-x335.google.com with SMTP id a8-20020a05683012c800b0060c027c8afdso5403949otq.10 for ; Wed, 08 Jun 2022 11:01:13 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=eVoUzYyiu7w4nqdX6Woj6d+MnP33uvZgWbH2TfGziLc=; b=OdfUdYglS+azIQXY85W2SGm3T4Lx76xul8ZsYPYjQhm/OrU7HtxLuYopueKQ4JGieN 9Ztdlt9S9zCO8LNRZPyPvbzvPGUtkLs2xsnl+gMbP+Tj+QdAiZQaNmCLl4uSRDwHr13t FkSp9gnGje7RNG/OnRAQ0WGR6b49G0GCKoHmCxorOSYSMrr5ZmAanngb10+uwkE6ANX3 tJOppuWKS5BTIxiEY1mE1R+L+L/I/JznIQyK6HowrXVdQole7/pSW6gXZtgEqGyxKMi5 BDlARiqUBU8gCi8SZLbDDp1WkvHFZFds+2dpWl0gfT3GE9EDFLB9kCfaNfBU10G7vhwb NI2Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=eVoUzYyiu7w4nqdX6Woj6d+MnP33uvZgWbH2TfGziLc=; b=SLQYzMpOcnprfzndNONeCzKAIwBN1dJ5s6wQPMPrvX+/Sg0O69B8NQtpD28KH7BJK4 LmI+2my9YKrBTm/O98apcMlnfwHzmf67iKZqoxqPOo0UmHmf2BXdDaHb2d+XwQs0Igju /BRtrf4BSoaNqEabXCAEwq+Ele2v1AFoO4z2tVkOmtIcaASfyU74YAHeVJ7Onk/W4CAy NUAXDbnjnpbtHJYV9EIfRHb+n2zgOT+0Ba695giM69I+7CDTAm0pk6LWO8+t5iJuDjeI 3XmPW4L421g+s6oxUUXRfNzBipdrYXNK1Q0ElxtUptvWpkABCxw7o/q1ducwYA8HUl4P iGZA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530cb8m6GdtpO7tfURm0Cjadt2oLcMRgTFuZ11LRWDKctJg2wC15 0GtWGF7DyIW3JtnwVbpAxJV8di1IIabk1PkZxyuefFD50KzwKg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJx5gccyuN3mRE7GCoQ5dAW/zi6+kkXY2bKALiJ28OZ2gbuCctsYllQfFuUp+zk2eRO9ihaTGuDhb83SsOg/vwU= X-Received: by 2002:a9d:5907:0:b0:60b:b346:73d2 with SMTP id t7-20020a9d5907000000b0060bb34673d2mr14657269oth.130.1654711271577; Wed, 08 Jun 2022 11:01:11 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20220606235449.2890858-1-calvinwan@google.com> In-Reply-To: From: Calvin Wan Date: Wed, 8 Jun 2022 11:01:00 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] submodule merge: update conflict error message To: Glen Choo Cc: Junio C Hamano , git@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org > The user probably > wants to merge the submodules, but they can choose however they want to > resolve the merge conflict It sounds like I should reword "merge conflicted submodules" to "resolve conflicted submodules". That should cover those 10% cases. I would prefer to find a generic, but still helpful message that doesn't require going into the advice() API or require some config change On Wed, Jun 8, 2022 at 10:35 AM Glen Choo wrote: > > Calvin Wan writes: > > >> Hmph. Is 1. necessary? > > > > I just tested it and it is not, so I do agree recommending to abort the > > merge is unnecessary/bad advice. How does this sound? > > > > Failed to merge submodule > > CONFLICT (submodule): Merge conflict in > > Automatic merge failed; recursive merging with submodules is currently > > not supported. To manually merge, merge conflicted submodules first > > before merging the superproject. > > This message sounds ok to me, since this is probably what the user wants > 90% of the time. Since we don't abort the merge, this just a 'regular' > merge conflict resolution (albeit with submodules). The user probably > wants to merge the submodules, but they can choose however they want to > resolve the merge conflict, e.g. maybe they'd prefer to just pick one > side (or even more exotically, a different commit altogether.) > > An improvement for that other 10% would be to print this help message > with the advice() API so that users can turn it off if they don't find > it helpful. Or maybe it's confusing to some new users who use a > different merging workflow and so an admin might turn off this advice > for them.