On Wed, Mar 06, 2013 at 01:09:41PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Jeff King <p...@peff.net> writes:
> > But it would apply to the content that is outside
> > of the hunk marker; we have changed the concept of what is in the base
> > and what is in the conflict by shrinking the conflict to its smallest
> > size.
> Hmm, unless you mean by "base" something entirely different from
> "what was in the common ancestor version", I do not think I can
> agree. The point of diff3 mode is to show how it looked line in the
> common ancestor and what the conflicting sides want to change that
> common version into; letting the user view three versions to help
> him decide what to do by only looking at the part inside conflict
> We show "both sides added, either identically or differently" as
> noteworthy events, but the patched code pushes "both sides added
> identically" case outside the conflicting hunk, as if what was added
I didn't test, but "both sides removed identically" should be moved out,
too, shouldn't it?
> relative to the common ancestor version (in Uwe's case, is it 1-14
> that is common, or just 10-14?) is not worth looking at when
> considering what the right resolution is. If it is not worth
> looking at what was in the original for the conflicting part, why
> would we be even using diff3 mode in the first place?
because even zdiff3 contains more information than merge. And compared
to diff3 it's smaller sometimes and so easier to understand.
Other than that I agree fully to the things Jeff said so far.
Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König |
Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html