Re: en/merge-tree (Was: Re: What's cooking in git.git (Feb 2022, #08; Mon, 28))

[Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>]

Hi Elijah,

On Tue, 8 Mar 2022, Elijah Newren wrote:

> On Mon, Mar 7, 2022 at 8:31 AM Johannes Schindelin
> <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, 1 Mar 2022, Elijah Newren wrote:
> >
> > > On Tue, Mar 1, 2022 at 7:26 AM Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > * en/merge-tree (2022-02-23) 13 commits
> > > >  - git-merge-tree.txt: add a section on potentional usage mistakes
> > > >  - merge-tree: add a --allow-unrelated-histories flag
> > > >  - merge-tree: allow `ls-files -u` style info to be NUL terminated
> > > >  - merge-tree: provide easy access to `ls-files -u` style info
> > > >  - merge-tree: provide a list of which files have conflicts
> > > >  - merge-ort: provide a merge_get_conflicted_files() helper function
> > > >  - merge-tree: support including merge messages in output
> > > >  - merge-ort: split out a separate display_update_messages() function
> > > >  - merge-tree: implement real merges
> > > >  - merge-tree: add option parsing and initial shell for real merge function
> > > >  - merge-tree: move logic for existing merge into new function
> > > >  - merge-tree: rename merge_trees() to trivial_merge_trees()
> > > >  - Merge branch 'en/remerge-diff' into en/merge-trees
> > > >
> > > >  A new command is introduced that takes two commits and computes a
> > > >  tree that would be contained in the resulting merge commit, if the
> > > >  histories leading to these two commits were to be merged, and is
> > > >  added as a new mode of "git merge-tree" subcommand.
> > > >
> > > >  Will merge to 'next'.
> > > >  source: <pull.1122.v6.git.1645602413.gitgitgadget@gmail.com>
>
> So even though
> everyone else is saying to merge it down, I'd rather not quite yet.

Fair enough. I guess I'm just eager to see it land, and I do not need the
machine-parseable aspect of the conflict messages _quite_ yet ;-)

Ciao,
Dscho