From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox•com>
To: Jeff King <peff@peff•net>
Cc: Stefan Beller <sbeller@google•com>,
Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google•com>,
"git\@vger.kernel.org" <git@vger•kernel.org>
Subject: Re: fuzzy patch application
Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2017 14:31:31 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <xmqqy3xdisos.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170210214850.2ok62xdmemgotwnt@sigill.intra.peff.net> (Jeff King's message of "Fri, 10 Feb 2017 16:48:51 -0500")
Jeff King <peff@peff•net> writes:
> I dunno. I always use it, but I'm not sure if there are any downsides,
> aside from a little extra processing time. It does have some
> incompatibilities with other options. And I think it kicks in rename
> detection (but I might be mis-remembering another feature). That could
> be surprising, I guess.
>
> The original dates all the way back to 47f0b6d5d (Fall back to three-way
> merge when applying a patch., 2005-10-06), but I don't see any rationale
> for not making it the default. Junio probably could give a better
> answer.
Nothing deep. Just being cautious by not to enable extra frills by
default, making it strictly o-p-t i-n. As that was a strict fall
back (i.e. there was no "if we are going to fall back, we need to
spend extra cycles to do this extra preparation before we attempt
the regular application"), extra-processing cost was not a concern,
at least back I wrote it the first time. I do not offhand know if
that still holds in the current one that was rewritten in C.
Making "am -3" default may also scare users who are not exactly
comfortable with reading "git diff" output during a conflicted merge
and resolving a conflict, but other than that there shouldn't be any
downside.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-02-10 22:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-02-10 19:20 fuzzy patch application Nick Desaulniers
2017-02-10 19:38 ` Junio C Hamano
2017-02-10 20:57 ` Jeff King
2017-02-10 21:37 ` Stefan Beller
2017-02-10 21:48 ` Jeff King
2017-02-10 22:31 ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
2017-02-10 22:53 ` Junio C Hamano
2017-02-10 22:56 ` Nick Desaulniers
2017-02-11 3:09 ` Junio C Hamano
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=xmqqy3xdisos.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com \
--to=gitster@pobox$(echo .)com \
--cc=git@vger$(echo .)kernel.org \
--cc=ndesaulniers@google$(echo .)com \
--cc=peff@peff$(echo .)net \
--cc=sbeller@google$(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