Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] merge-file: honor merge.conflictStyle outside of a repository

From: Junio C Hamano <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2026 13:53:16 -0800

Yannik Tausch <[email-masked]> writes:

>> Junio C Hamano <[email-masked]> wrote:
>
>> Wouldn't it suffice to unconditionally execute the body of the if
>> (startup_info->have_repository) block to pass "repo" we obtained
>> from the caller to repo_config() instead of the_repository?  The
>> caller of this function passes us either the_repository or NULL and
>> repo_config() does the very-early thing when passed NULL as the
>> repo, signalling that we are outside a repository.
>
> Jup, looks like I missed that. Implemented your suggestion!
> ...
> Done!
>
> Here is the new patch:
>
> From 9fa437c70bfd328cfdfe9cfca982b49b70ad033f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Yannik Tausch <[email-masked]>
> Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2026 21:09:52 +0100
> Subject: [PATCH v2] merge-file: honor merge.conflictStyle outside of a
>  repository

Please do not send patches this way.  Giving responses to review
comments is very good and strongly encouraged, but stop the response
message with "a new version of the patch coming!" and have a separate
message for the patch itself.

It sometimes is done to interject a sample patch in the middle of a
discussion, but then the convention is

	... continuation of an existing discussion ...

	So, how about doing things this way?

	--- >8 ---
	Subject: the title of the patch

	The proposed log message for the commit comes here

	Signed-off-by: you
	---

	... notes, diffstat, diff ...

i.e., use a scissors line to tell the receiving end that the rest of
the message is a patch message, and override the Subject: with an
in-body header.  Omit the (From <object-name> Mon Sep 17 2001)
"magic" line, "From:" and "Date:".  The last two can be taken from
the e-mail message anyway.