From: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
To: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Cc: Git Mailing List <git@vger.kernel.org>,
Adam Dinwoodie <adam@dinwoodie.org>,
David Turner <dturner@twitter.com>,
David Turner <dturner@twopensource.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] merge-recursive: ignore_case shouldn't reject intentional removals
Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2017 14:35:46 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CABPp-BGcfFOvv+-uW2_EaftLiU-xs_D4g8hsYOZqjk1XwK_8Fw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <xmqqd147kpdm.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>
On Fri, Nov 24, 2017 at 7:29 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
> Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> But what it really is forced to do is more of a 4-way merge; a good
>> chunk of its annoying complexity is based around this (undocumented
>> and unfortunate) reality. It derives from what I consider a simple
>> design flaw.
>
> Yes, and it does not help that it wants to write into the filesystem
> while it performs the outermost merges.
>
> In the ideal world, we should
>
> - ask unpack_trees() to do "read-tree -m" without "-u";
>
> - do all the merge-recursive computations in-core and prepare the
> resulting index, while keeping the current index intact;
>
> - compare the current in-core index and the resulting in-core
> index, and notice the paths that need to be added, updated or
> removed in the working tree, and ensure that there is no loss of
> information when the change is reflected to the working tree,
> e.g. the result wants to create a file where the working tree
> currently has a directory with non-expendable contents in it, the
> result wants to remove a file where the working tree file has
> local modification, etc.; and then finally
>
> - carry out the working tree update to make it match what the
> resulting in-core index says it should look like.
I had another email I had been composing to try to argue for changing
merge-recursive.c's design to the above, assuming I could get the time
to work on it. Nice to see that I'm not crazy, and that I apparently
don't need to do much convincing. :-)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-11-25 22:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-11-24 19:59 [PATCH] merge-recursive: ignore_case shouldn't reject intentional removals Elijah Newren
2017-11-24 20:04 ` Eric Sunshine
2017-11-24 20:29 ` Elijah Newren
2017-11-25 3:29 ` Junio C Hamano
2017-11-25 22:35 ` Elijah Newren [this message]
2017-11-26 2:32 ` Junio C Hamano
2017-11-27 3:40 ` Junio C Hamano
2017-11-27 16:40 ` Elijah Newren
2017-11-27 23:39 ` Junio C Hamano
2017-11-28 1:02 ` Elijah Newren
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2019-03-04 23:07 Woody Woodman
2019-03-06 14:23 ` Johannes Schindelin
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=CABPp-BGcfFOvv+-uW2_EaftLiU-xs_D4g8hsYOZqjk1XwK_8Fw@mail.gmail.com \
--to=newren@gmail.com \
--cc=adam@dinwoodie.org \
--cc=dturner@twitter.com \
--cc=dturner@twopensource.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
/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).