Subject: Re: git and bzr

From: Nicholas Allen <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2006 23:00:55 +0100

Linus Torvalds wrote:
> 
> On Tue, 28 Nov 2006, Nicholas Allen wrote:
>> and here's how it looked in git:
>> git status
> 
> Ehh. It told you exactly what happened when you actually did the merge, 
> didn't it?
> 
> Yeah, "git status" won't tell you _why_ it results in unmerged paths, but 
> the merge will have told you.  You must have seen that, but decided to 
> just ignore it and not post it, because it didn't support the conclusion 
> you wanted to get, did it?

I didn't do this deliberately - it's just because merge spewed out a
whole load of stuff at me that I didn't understand and therefore
overlooked the conflict message in it. I wasn't expecting to see it here
anyway and was hoping for a short and informative summary that I would
understand when I did a status.

Also what happens if I loose the messages because they scrolled off
screen or the power goes down, I need to reboot for some reason, or I
don't have time and want to shutdown my computer restart another day and
resolve the conflicts then? All useful conflict status is lost isn't it?
That's why I expected git status to tell me this in some understandable
manner and was not even expecting it to only be in the merge output....