On Sun, Feb 23, 2014 at 6:57 AM, Thomas Rast <t...@thomasrast.ch> wrote: > Eric Sunshine <sunsh...@sunshineco.com> writes: > >> On Sat, Feb 22, 2014 at 4:17 AM, Thomas Rast <t...@thomasrast.ch> wrote: >>> Using the new no_worktree flag from the previous commit, we can teach >>> merge-recursive to leave the worktree untouched. Expose this with a >>> new strategy option so that scripts can use it. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobox.com> >>> --- >>> diff --git a/Documentation/merge-strategies.txt >>> b/Documentation/merge-strategies.txt >>> index fb6e593..2934e99 100644 >>> --- a/Documentation/merge-strategies.txt >>> +++ b/Documentation/merge-strategies.txt >>> @@ -92,6 +92,10 @@ subtree[=<path>];; >>> is prefixed (or stripped from the beginning) to make the shape of >>> two trees to match. >>> >>> +index-only;; >> >> s/;;/::/ > > I think ;; is actually correct: this continues the sub-list of options > to the recursive strategy. The :: level lists the available strategies.
Make sense. Thanks for the explanation. >>> + Write the merge result only to the index; do not touch the >>> + worktree. >>> + >>> octopus:: >>> This resolves cases with more than two heads, but refuses to do >>> a complex merge that needs manual resolution. It is >> -- >> 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 > > -- > Thomas Rast > t...@thomasrast.ch -- 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