Re: [PATCH 7/7] xdiff: make diff3 the default conflictStyle

From: Johannes Sixt <j6t@kdbg.org>
To: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Cc: "Jeff King" <peff@peff.net>,
	"Felipe Contreras" <felipe.contreras@gmail.com>,
	"David Aguilar" <davvid@gmail.com>,
	"Sergey Organov" <sorganov@gmail.com>,
	"Bagas Sanjaya" <bagasdotme@gmail.com>,
	"Elijah Newren" <newren@gmail.com>,
	"Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason" <avarab@gmail.com>,
	"Denton Liu" <liu.denton@gmail.com>,
	git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/7] xdiff: make diff3 the default conflictStyle
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2021 09:02:54 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <07ef3a3b-4812-4fa1-c60c-b9085a268bc3@kdbg.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <xmqqy2bg3nqw.fsf@gitster.g>

Am 11.06.21 um 08:43 schrieb Junio C Hamano:
> Johannes Sixt <j6t@kdbg.org> writes:
> 
>> But I would estimate that most conflicts (in absolute number among all
>> developers using Git) arise during rebase operations and cherry-picking,
>> i.e., while one is working on their own code. In such sitations, the
>> simpler conflict markup is sufficient, because one knows the background
>> and reason of the conflicts.
> 
> "rebase -i" to reorganize one's own series would be a prime example
> of "conflicts you need to resolve in code that is purely your own
> and nobody else's", and cherry-picking used while reorganizing one's
> own series falls into the same category.  I agree that a simpler
> markup would be more appropriate in such cases.
> 
> Rebasing to catch up with updated upstream is a different story,
> though.  The same for cherry-picking an earlier change to an updated
> upstream.

I've reflected on this a bit more as well. I've forgotten about the
"catch up with someone else" case. That is certainly helped by diff3
style. I retract my opposition and am now neutral to a potential change
of default. (I still don't endorse it because it upsets my workflow.)

The case that inner conflicts are presented sub-optimally under diff3
remains, though.

-- Hannes