From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.3 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI, RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41D8E1F4F8 for ; Mon, 17 Oct 2016 17:51:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S934016AbcJQRvy (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Oct 2016 13:51:54 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com ([64.147.108.71]:64911 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932125AbcJQRvx (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Oct 2016 13:51:53 -0400 Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB7E344DAB; Mon, 17 Oct 2016 13:51:51 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=5whbkvoLAc12DAy6iNOGtn5l21c=; b=P3o7em HtCFcZhXJ6gYnSvDCbYAg3Usxb7csnuy+ZmLKXOGSBdzS4Kplyx6wcnW/phzqdqZ f9yExPmj9BJrQ6EenaHHA6+Gob/Q3zhWLwlUK5KQCiYNeoCgFoVy/3Ew9B2ZjPWi +O9bQEdXlAl6nX1XzLFF+HXZHxrZUf5gp1tus= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=j+5BBG0LsdkP7C05s84Tfe94IF8fh/79 BETb/XbqeQ2K0Q48o9vK1PKSyL3PXJLb+l3ey1fFne2U5yJ98607YQSRVEqbH939 vw3/VfBLptM5gxJDEzGt0ONwrKI0X9fTSQXhQen5UMAeup15vnjd7AmTdYN/cLfz op82fnfyq10= Received: from pb-smtp2.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E37DA44DAA; Mon, 17 Oct 2016 13:51:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [104.132.0.95]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6557244DA9; Mon, 17 Oct 2016 13:51:51 -0400 (EDT) From: Junio C Hamano To: Johannes Schindelin Cc: Lars Schneider , git , Jeff King , me@ttaylorr.com Subject: Re: Merge conflicts in .gitattributes can cause trouble References: <248A6E81-8D5C-4183-9756-51A0D5193E3E@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2016 10:51:49 -0700 In-Reply-To: (Johannes Schindelin's message of "Mon, 17 Oct 2016 18:11:00 +0200 (CEST)") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 6228F46C-9492-11E6-AEE8-3AB77A1B28F4-77302942!pb-smtp2.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Johannes Schindelin writes: > I would vote for: > > 4. We keep letting Git read in the *current* version of .gitattributes > *before* the merge, and apply those attributes while performing the > merge. Even though this needs a major surgery to the way the attr subsystem reads from these files, I think it is conceptually the cleanest.