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: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.9 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id D896A1F5AD for ; Sun, 12 Apr 2020 10:12:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726867AbgDLKMO (ORCPT ); Sun, 12 Apr 2020 06:12:14 -0400 Received: from smtp.hosts.co.uk ([85.233.160.19]:65166 "EHLO smtp.hosts.co.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725909AbgDLKMO (ORCPT ); Sun, 12 Apr 2020 06:12:14 -0400 Received: from [92.30.123.115] (helo=[192.168.1.38]) by smtp.hosts.co.uk with esmtpa (Exim) (envelope-from ) id 1jNZb2-00068z-4S; Sun, 12 Apr 2020 11:12:12 +0100 Subject: Re: configure remote/local as mine/theirs To: Johannes Sixt , rupert THURNER Cc: Git Mailing List References: From: Philip Oakley Message-ID: <0360e896-73b9-3585-54a2-5427bfafaae1@iee.email> Date: Sun, 12 Apr 2020 11:12:12 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Language: en-GB Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Hi Robert, Johannes On 11/04/2020 22:40, Johannes Sixt wrote: > 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. Robert, 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!) I suggest this as a way of flagging to the reader that they should 'stop and think' (which we never do if we already have the wrong mental model) and perhaps go and review the distinctions. -- Philip