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

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
To: Johannes Sixt <j6t@kdbg.org>
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 15:43:19 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <xmqqy2bg3nqw.fsf@gitster.g> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <638a0500-459a-a25b-afca-904ec0e09866@kdbg.org> (Johannes Sixt's message of "Fri, 11 Jun 2021 08:23:30 +0200")

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.