Antoine Pelisse <> writes:

> And I
> have the feeling that "merge-fix/B" or "merge-fix/A" doesn't hold
> enough information to do that accurately.

Oh, you do not have to resort to feeling; these names do _not_ hold
enough information, period.  We already know that, that was why I was
unhappy, and that was why I sent the "annotating a pair of commit
objects" RFD in the first place ;-).

> The idea is then to store the <A, B> pair as a note, and to associate
> a "merge" to that (solving the semantic conflict).

OK, and as the datastore for <A, B> pair you were thinking about
using a specially-formatted blob and Johan suggested to use a
regular tree object?
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at

Reply via email to