Re: [PATCH] Documentation/git-merge.txt: weaken warning about uncommited changes
Matthieu Moy wrote: Weaken the warning by discouraging only merge with /non-trivial/ uncommited changes. I don't think documenting all the failure cases in the doc would be a good idea, so I've left the in some cases part. It's already documented in the pre-merge checks section, as Jonathan pointed out [1]. We should update the documentation to point to it: I do not think non-trivial is much of an improvement. [1]: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/221069/focus=221366 -- 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
Re: [PATCH] Documentation/git-merge.txt: weaken warning about uncommited changes
Ramkumar Ramachandra artag...@gmail.com writes: Matthieu Moy wrote: Weaken the warning by discouraging only merge with /non-trivial/ uncommited changes. I don't think documenting all the failure cases in the doc would be a good idea, so I've left the in some cases part. It's already documented in the pre-merge checks section, as Jonathan pointed out [1]. I had missed this one. But that's not the only case, you may also have problems with renames. The complete list would be really long to have here, and won't bring much to the user. We should update the documentation to point to it: I do not think non-trivial is much of an improvement. Actually, I think it essentially says it all. If your changes are important enough to deserve a real backup, you should stash or commit. If you're ready to take the risk of losing it (the risk is small, but does exist), it's OK to run git merge blindly. -- Matthieu Moy http://www-verimag.imag.fr/~moy/ -- 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
Re: [PATCH] Documentation/git-merge.txt: weaken warning about uncommited changes
Matthieu Moy matthieu@grenoble-inp.fr writes: Ramkumar Ramachandra artag...@gmail.com writes: Matthieu Moy wrote: Weaken the warning by discouraging only merge with /non-trivial/ uncommited changes. I don't think documenting all the failure cases in the doc would be a good idea, so I've left the in some cases part. It's already documented in the pre-merge checks section, as Jonathan pointed out [1]. I had missed this one. But that's not the only case, you may also have problems with renames. The complete list would be really long to have here, and won't bring much to the user. True. After having re-read the thread up to the message from Jonathan, I suspect that a merge half of pull --autosquash series (which had to be dropped) was based on a misunderstanding and we didn't have to have that discussion if the documentation were a little less discouraging about merging in a dirty working tree? We should update the documentation to point to it: I do not think non-trivial is much of an improvement. Actually, I think it essentially says it all. If your changes are important enough to deserve a real backup, you should stash or commit. If you're ready to take the risk of losing it (the risk is small, but does exist), it's OK to run git merge blindly. Your documentation update makes sure that we are less discouraging, I think. It does not have to be the only phrasing (hinting others to try to come up with a beeter version if they are so inclined), but it is going in the right direction. -- 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
