On Sun, Dec 13, 2015 at 05:55:59PM +0000, rohit gupta wrote: > Hi, > I am confused with git merge working. > > Suppose I have these 3 files in master branch- > a.txt > b.txt > d.txt > > I create a branch, add c.txt to it and commit. So its final contents > are- > a.txt > b.txt > c.txt > d.txt > > Then, I checkout master branch, delete a.txt, add e.txt and commit. So > final contents are- > b.txt > d.txt > e.txt > > Now when I merge branch in master, > its result is- > b.txt > c.txt > d.txt > e.txt > > Now suppose in branch, a.txt was needed for its working. And in master > branch's latest commit a.txt was removed because maybe it wasn't needed > or it was introducing bugs. > Now, git merge removes that a.txt > So now branch functionality wouldn't work. > Isn't that wrong??
Instead of thinking of Git as merging two sets of files, think of it as merging two sets of changes. Git computes a merge base based on one or more ancestors of both branches. During a merge, Git takes the differences on each side and combines them. Logically, if a change is made on one side but not the other, it will be preserved in the merge. So in your case, you deleted a.txt on one side and did not modify it on the other. Git applied that change to the result of the merge. Git has no way of knowing that a.txt is still required in the result. This is a very common question that comes up in a variety of different forms. -- brian m. carlson / brian with sandals: Houston, Texas, US +1 832 623 2791 | https://www.crustytoothpaste.net/~bmc | My opinion only OpenPGP: RSA v4 4096b: 88AC E9B2 9196 305B A994 7552 F1BA 225C 0223 B187
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
