On Fri, Mar 2, 2018 at 3:17 AM, Phillip Wood <p...@philandanna.no-ip.org> wrote: > > It is interesting to think what it means to faithfully rebase a '-s > ours' merge. In your example the rebase does not introduce any new > changes into branch B that it doesn't introduce to branch A. Had it > added a fixup to branch B1 for example or if the topology was more > complex so that B ended up with some other changes that the rebase did > not introduce into A, then M' would contain those extra changes whereas > '--recreate-merges' with '-s ours' (once it supports it) would not. >
Unless the method of merging was stored, I don't think we *can* correctly automate resolving of "-s ours" because all we store is the resulting content, and we don't know how or why the user generated it as such. I believe the "correct" solution in any case would be to take the content we DO know and then ask the user to stop for amendments. Thanks, Jake
