From: <rsbecker@nexbridge.com>
To: <git@isandrew.com>, <git@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: Theirs merge strategy
Date: Sun, 25 Dec 2022 12:43:47 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <007c01d91888$74673500$5d359f00$@nexbridge.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5b64c7f5-59e3-f319-4efa-4624907436b6@isandrew.com>
On December 25, 2022 12:19 PM, Andrew wrote:
>Would it be possible to revisit the decision to not have a "theirs"
>merge strategy?
>
>I think there are legitimate reasons to use it, beyond the plenty of rope argument.
>
>One example is you're working with a successfully written and operating branch
>through multiple releases, but due to some external change (product direction,
>upstream changes) you decide that an approach in a different branch is
>better. You want to use the other branch, while keeping the history of the
>successful prior releases, for all the normal reasons one wants to keep history. A
>hard reset wouldn't help in this case.
>
>The decision to remove it was to prevent people from having bad workflows. In
>reality, in lieu of theirs people use ours in reverse which is even worse.
>
>The previous discussion I found was at
>https://marc.info/?l=git&m=121637513604413&w=2
This use case applies more generally in some release workflows. A valid (and common in my world) workflow can have with multiple release branches, and the same pull request going to a selection of release branch. Conflicts occasionally happen in the pull request merge, but the pull request, in a high audit situation cannot be modified - conflicts are resolved later under a separate signature. The -s theirs permits the pull requests to be merged intact with no changes (as required by various audit rules).
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-12-25 17:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-12-25 17:19 Theirs merge strategy git
2022-12-25 17:43 ` rsbecker [this message]
2022-12-26 4:46 ` git
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='007c01d91888$74673500$5d359f00$@nexbridge.com' \
--to=rsbecker@nexbridge.com \
--cc=git@isandrew.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://80x24.org/mirrors/git.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).