From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Kastrup Subject: Re: [RFC 0/3] Make git more user-friendly during a merge conflict Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2014 18:33:03 +0100 Message-ID: <87eh2n16sw.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> References: <1393437985-31401-1-git-send-email-andrew.kw.w@gmail.com> <20140226202601.GK7855@google.com> <857g8f1ugu.fsf@stephe-leake.org> <87fvn335sm.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <858usvz5nj.fsf@stephe-leake.org> <87txbj1fnw.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <85zjlb1740.fsf@stephe-leake.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: git@vger.kernel.org To: Stephen Leake X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Feb 28 18:53:41 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1WJRcy-0001Zy-TQ for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Fri, 28 Feb 2014 18:53:41 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753015AbaB1Rxg convert rfc822-to-quoted-printable (ORCPT ); Fri, 28 Feb 2014 12:53:36 -0500 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([208.118.235.10]:55311 "EHLO fencepost.gnu.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752185AbaB1Rxg convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Fri, 28 Feb 2014 12:53:36 -0500 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:54350 helo=lola) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WJRcs-0001g9-Ka; Fri, 28 Feb 2014 12:53:34 -0500 Received: by lola (Postfix, from userid 1000) id C1260E0BFA; Fri, 28 Feb 2014 18:33:03 +0100 (CET) In-Reply-To: <85zjlb1740.fsf@stephe-leake.org> (Stephen Leake's message of "Fri, 28 Feb 2014 11:26:23 -0600") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3.50 (gnu/linux) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Stephen Leake writes: > David Kastrup writes: > >> Stephen Leake writes: >> >>> David Kastrup writes: >>> >>>> "do the right thing" commands also tend to do the wrong thing >>>> occasionally with potentially disastrous results when they are use= d >>>> 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 y= et >>> to see an actual use case of bad behavior in this discussion. >> >> Huh. >> >> > > That's about backward incompatibility, which is bad, but not what I w= as > 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=A0ha= ve not yet seen anything I=A0would be interested in doing myself". --=20 David Kastrup