>I think git did the "right thing", it just happened to be the thing that
>Tony didn't want. Which makes it the "wrong thing", of course, but from a
>purely technical standpoint, I don't think there's anything really wrong
>with the merge. 

On the plus side ... at least it wasn't a dumb user error this time [unless
you count merging the incorrect patch in the first place, and then having
to revert it :-) ].

Could GIT be smarter here?  Perhaps it could pick a few likely
ancestors and run the merge with each ... and then give some
warnings if there are files that come out differently?

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to