Subject: Re: Merge-Recursive Improvements

From: Johannes Sixt <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2008 08:39:43 +0100

Voltage Spike schrieb:
> Third, git doesn't appear to have any sense of context when performing a
> merge. Another contrived example which wouldn't be flagged as a merge
> conflict:
> 
>   ptr = malloc(len); // Added in HEAD.
>   init();            // Included in merge-base.
>   ptr = malloc(len); // Added in "merge".

You seem to say that you want this to result in a merge conflict.

I'm opposed to this: It means that you would mark a conflict if there is a
single unchanged line between the two changes that come from the merged
branches. So far it has happened for me much more frequently that such
merges were correct, and I should not be bothered with conflict markers. I
conciously prefer to pay the price that such a merge is incorrect on occasion.

You also need to draw a border line: a single unchanged line between the
changes? Or better also conflict at 2 lines? Or 3?

-- Hannes