From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.1 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 38BE8C433E8 for ; Thu, 16 Jul 2020 17:32:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 06CEB2083B for ; Thu, 16 Jul 2020 17:32:02 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b="q3EPR1kA" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1729092AbgGPRcA (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Jul 2020 13:32:00 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com ([64.147.108.70]:52851 "EHLO pb-smtp1.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728672AbgGPRcA (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Jul 2020 13:32:00 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DDA1078405; Thu, 16 Jul 2020 13:31:57 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=JcNoZPUqF536uPpllUbLW2wEBoI=; b=q3EPR1 kAIkox752s74iyJB7eU+e00/XoaVEBZU4IQUMNrCR9xdCtuQ1qjOfGJWUsSYsBgj vyFdJKNug/3YHcIn+8ruaaB7lH+TIhs87mDfrAV/t/tLjnbhLa1gLTHC3lKw16VO fnXL6L3a/4C8L3yjin+TEaNpQPkI9oCPeWLGA= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=tEUtSW5Fh5kdKyQRaNHWo5AJL0DJWZJ8 LaziRO2ZqUVtc4I/ZiEyXSB41olW/d9p/3sooZ7gJEyNaGuVweS57tF3EWkSqE+X h877WXag78BoWn3Bhx+PXLY5LcY03IhbbL47YIciZcSJ5uieKaKo9fK+4+/vAw/W VUVIpX/CTmY= Received: from pb-smtp1.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D67FE78404; Thu, 16 Jul 2020 13:31:57 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [35.231.104.69]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 562FB78403; Thu, 16 Jul 2020 13:31:57 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Alireza Cc: git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Request for adding a "clean" merge strategy for a double-commit merge to deal with conflicts separately References: Date: Thu, 16 Jul 2020 10:31:56 -0700 In-Reply-To: (Alireza's message of "Thu, 16 Jul 2020 21:45:24 +0430") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 3F8B14D8-C78A-11EA-954F-01D9BED8090B-77302942!pb-smtp1.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Alireza writes: > The proposal is that an option like `-X clean` would commit a clean > merge and leave out any conflicting hunks in the tree for a follow-up > commit to resolve conflicts. You need to clarify what "leave out" means to you. If you and a side branch started from the same place and you did one thing while the side branch did something else, you would get a conflict. What would the "clean" (by your definition) result have in that block of contents that actually has a conflict? Do you mean to say "Pick our version and ignore theirs in the blocks where the changes conflict"? If so perhaps -Xours merge strategy option that the recursive backend offers is what you are looking for?