On Fri, Nov 01, 2013 at 03:44:52PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:

> Here is a proposed endgame for the topic in a patch form, then.
> I've added a test for low-level "read-tree --reset -u A B", and
> tried the "am --abort" I saw the problem with manually, but other
> than that, I haven't (re)thought about the issue hard enough to be
> comfortable with this change yet.

Thanks for moving this forward.

I read over the old discussion and the patches, and I think the patch is
a good thing. There was some question from me earlier on whether there
were other cases we weren't considering.  The discussion convinced me
that there almost certainly aren't. And even if there are, this is still
the right direction. Writing out a bogus CE_CONFLICTED entry is
_certainly_ wrong, so even if we do not get the details right (e.g.,
rejecting a merge we should be accepting), this patch still forms a base
for further fixups.

> Jeff King (1):
>   unpack-trees: fix "read-tree -u --reset A B" with conflicted index

My missing signoff:

  Signed-off-by: Jeff King <p...@peff.net>

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

Reply via email to