From: Jakub Narebski <jnareb@gmail•com>
To: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses•org>
Cc: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox•com>,
Marius Storm-Olsen <marius@trolltech•com>,
Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx•de>,
Johannes Sixt <j.sixt@viscovery•net>, git <git@vger•kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Respecting core.autocrlf when showing objects
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2008 13:27:15 -0700 (PDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <m3mylqqu05.fsf@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080612195553.GK13626@fieldses.org>
"J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses•org> writes:
> (Is there any advantage, then, to the :n:filename syntax to a user?
> Is it useful in any cases when they couldn't use HEAD or MERGE_HEAD
> instead? If not I might be tempted to cut this bit entirely (or
> postpone it till later.)
I'm not sure, but I think that while HEAD and MERGE_HEAD vs :n:
differ in the tree represented (in the index trivial / tree conflicts
are resolved) they have the same file contents for conflicting files.
I think that :n: syntax is just shorter, especially for the ancestor
(c.f. $(git merge-base HEAD MERGE_HEAD)).
And of course there is octopus merge to be considered...
--
Jakub Narebski
Poland
ShadeHawk on #git
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-06-12 20:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <"Storm-Olsen*"@MHS>
2008-06-09 11:40 ` [PATCH] Add testcase for merging in a CRLF repo, showing that conflict file is in LF only Marius Storm-Olsen
2008-06-09 11:40 ` Marius Storm-Olsen
2008-06-09 13:37 ` Johannes Sixt
2008-06-09 14:46 ` Marius Storm-Olsen
2008-06-09 15:05 ` Johannes Sixt
2008-06-09 19:44 ` Marius Storm-Olsen
2008-06-09 21:22 ` [PATCH 1/2] Add testcase for merging in a CRLF repo Johannes Schindelin
2008-06-09 21:23 ` [PATCH 2/2] merge-recursive: respect core.autocrlf Johannes Schindelin
2008-06-09 21:36 ` Junio C Hamano
2008-06-09 22:59 ` [PATCH v2] " Johannes Schindelin
2008-06-09 23:23 ` Junio C Hamano
2008-06-09 23:35 ` Johannes Schindelin
2008-06-10 8:10 ` [PATCH 0/2] Respecting core.autocrlf when showing objects Marius Storm-Olsen
2008-06-10 7:40 ` [PATCH 1/2] Add testcases for verifying that staged files in a conflict are CRLF, when core.autocrlf = true Marius Storm-Olsen
2008-06-10 7:55 ` [PATCH 2/2] Ensure that objects shown in a core.autocrlf = true repo have CRLF EOLs Marius Storm-Olsen
2008-06-10 15:34 ` [PATCH 0/2] Respecting core.autocrlf when showing objects Johannes Schindelin
2008-06-10 22:25 ` Junio C Hamano
2008-06-11 6:01 ` Marius Storm-Olsen
2008-06-11 8:25 ` Jakub Narebski
2008-06-11 19:06 ` Johannes Schindelin
2008-06-12 9:03 ` Marius Storm-Olsen
2008-06-12 19:33 ` Junio C Hamano
2008-06-12 19:55 ` J. Bruce Fields
2008-06-12 20:27 ` Jakub Narebski [this message]
2008-06-12 20:45 ` Junio C Hamano
2008-06-12 20:50 ` Jon Loeliger
2008-06-12 20:16 ` Marius Storm-Olsen
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=m3mylqqu05.fsf@localhost.localdomain \
--to=jnareb@gmail$(echo .)com \
--cc=Johannes.Schindelin@gmx$(echo .)de \
--cc=bfields@fieldses$(echo .)org \
--cc=git@vger$(echo .)kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox$(echo .)com \
--cc=j.sixt@viscovery$(echo .)net \
--cc=marius@trolltech$(echo .)com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox