On 22.03.2012 22:33, Julian Foad wrote: > Branko Čibej wrote: >> I'm confused. What additional checks would --reintegrate do that your >> common or garden merge would skip? What kind of check do you think you >> can safely skip without throwing all the effort you're putting into >> fixing the merge algorithm out the window? > The checks of target WC state mentioned above. Of course, the name > "reintegrate" would then be less than appropriate, and we could consider a > new name that makes more sense for that "I expect this to be a clean simple > merge" kind of meaning. Is the use of an asymmetric-sounding option name for > a now-symmetric functionality what was making you uncomfortable?
No, what bugs me is the assumption that the user gives a pig's ear about whether the merge is "clean and simple" or whether the merge algorithm has to figure out all sorts of cherry picks and criss-cross twists. I very strongly suspect that the user doesn't care, she just wants merge to do the right thing, every time. What do you want --reintegrate to do, abort the merge if the user is wrong about "clean and simple?" Of course not. /Reporting/ the merge complexity is a different matter, but you can load that onto the --verbose flag, or even always report, "Resolved %d cherry picks and %d Gordian knots, of which %d required the Alexandrian solution." -- Brane
