From: Stephen Leake <stephen_leake@stephe-leake.org>
To: git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC 0/3] Make git more user-friendly during a merge conflict
Date: Sat, 01 Mar 2014 04:32:29 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <85vbvyxl8i.fsf@stephe-leake.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87eh2n16sw.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> (David Kastrup's message of "Fri, 28 Feb 2014 18:33:03 +0100")
David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> writes:
> Stephen Leake <stephen_leake@stephe-leake.org> writes:
>
>> David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> writes:
>>
>>> Stephen Leake <stephen_leake@stephe-leake.org> writes:
>>>
>>>> David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> "do the right thing" commands also tend to do the wrong thing
>>>>> occasionally with potentially disastrous results when they are used
>>>>> in scripts where the followup actions rely on the actual result.
>>>>
>>>> That is bad, and should not be allowed. On the other hand, I have yet
>>>> to see an actual use case of bad behavior in this discussion.
>>>
>>> Huh.
>>>
>>> <http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/242744>
>>
>> That's about backward incompatibility, which is bad, but not what I was
>> talking about above.
>
> No, it isn't. I quote:
>
> I sometimes run "git reset" during a merge to only reset the index
> and then examine the changes introduced by the merge. With your
> changes, someone doing so would abort the merge and discard the
> merge resolution. I very rarely do this, but even rarely, I
> wouldn't like Git to start droping data silently for me ;-).
>
> You should not make statements like "I have yet to see an actual use
> case of bad behavior in this discussion" when you actually mean "I have
> not yet seen anything I would be interested in doing myself".
Clearly I misunderstood your point. Merely repeating the same statement
that I misunderstood, and adding a misunderstanding of what I said, is
not helpful.
So let me see if I can expand on your use case:
- you do 'git merge', which results in conflicts
- you edit some workspace files to resolve some of those conflicts
(I added this step later, since it was implied but not explicit)
- you do 'git reset', intending 'git reset --mixed' (because that is the
current default)
Actually, I can't find a precise definition of 'git reset'. Here is
the synopsis from the man page for 'git-reset' (from git 1.7.9):
git reset [-q] [<commit>] [--] <paths>...
git reset (--patch | -p) [<commit>] [--] [<paths>...]
git reset (--soft | --mixed | --hard | --merge | --keep) [-q] [<commit>]
In 'git reset', there is no path, so it must be the second or third
form. But those _require_ one of the -- options. So 'git reset' is
illegal. Clearly something is wrong here; apparently the third line
should be:
git reset [--soft | --mixed | --hard | --merge | --keep] [-q] [<commit>]
with '--mixed' as the default, as is stated later. (perhaps the
original intent was to not have a default for the third form, but
that got changed sometime?).
This command "resets the index" but not the working tree. I'm not
clear what "reset the index" means here; does it mean "remove all
entries from the index", or "reset the index to some previous
state"? In other man pages, "reset" can have either meaning
depending on context.
- then you "examine changes introduced by the merge". I don't know what
this means in detail.
Before resetting the index, you could diff a workspace file against
either HEAD or index. Now you can only diff against HEAD, so I don't
understand why you wanted to reset the index. That's not relevant to
this use case; I'll just accept that resetting the index is a useful
thing to do here. But I would like to understand why.
- with the "do the right thing" patch, 'git reset' does 'git reset
--merge' instead
That "Resets the index and updates the files in the working tree
that are different between <commit> and HEAD".
"<commit>" in this case defaults to HEAD, so the working tree is
not changed.
So as I understand it, this does _not_ lose your conflict resolutions.
In fact, it now seems that 'git reset --mixed' is always the same as
'git reset --merge'. So I must be missing something!
--
-- Stephe
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-03-01 10:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-02-26 18:06 [RFC 0/3] Make git more user-friendly during a merge conflict Andrew Wong
2014-02-26 18:06 ` [RFC 1/3] wt-status: Make conflict hint message more consistent with other hints Andrew Wong
2014-02-26 20:34 ` Jonathan Nieder
2014-02-26 20:37 ` Junio C Hamano
2014-02-26 23:07 ` Andrew Wong
2014-02-26 18:06 ` [RFC 2/3] merge: Add hints to tell users about "git merge --abort" Andrew Wong
2014-02-26 20:38 ` Jonathan Nieder
2014-02-26 23:16 ` Andrew Wong
2014-03-05 15:30 ` Andrew Wong
2014-03-05 18:29 ` Junio C Hamano
2014-03-05 20:51 ` Andrew Wong
2014-03-05 21:20 ` Junio C Hamano
2014-03-05 18:35 ` Matthieu Moy
2014-02-26 18:06 ` [RFC 3/3] reset: Change the default behavior to use "--merge" during a merge Andrew Wong
2014-02-26 18:21 ` Matthieu Moy
2014-02-26 20:15 ` Andrew Wong
2014-02-26 20:48 ` Jonathan Nieder
2014-02-26 23:37 ` Andrew Wong
2014-02-26 20:57 ` Matthieu Moy
2014-02-27 0:00 ` Andrew Wong
2014-02-26 20:53 ` Junio C Hamano
2014-03-11 4:39 ` Andrew Wong
2014-02-26 20:26 ` [RFC 0/3] Make git more user-friendly during a merge conflict Jonathan Nieder
2014-02-28 9:01 ` Stephen Leake
2014-02-28 9:14 ` Charles Bailey
2014-02-28 10:11 ` David Kastrup
2014-02-28 14:13 ` Stephen Leake
2014-02-28 14:21 ` David Kastrup
2014-02-28 17:26 ` Stephen Leake
2014-02-28 17:33 ` David Kastrup
2014-03-01 10:32 ` Stephen Leake [this message]
2014-03-01 11:38 ` Matthieu Moy
2014-03-01 16:50 ` Stephen Leake
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=85vbvyxl8i.fsf@stephe-leake.org \
--to=stephen_leake@stephe-leake.org \
--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).