Jonathan,
THANK YOU lots for your exhaustive reply and handing of the wishlist.
On Fri, 14 May 2010, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> But yes, it is intuitive to expect this strategy to exist.
that is what I thought since ours is there
> Okay, so if it's so easy to provide a "theirs", why doesn't git
> already? See [1] above. Short answer: because it's almost always the
> wrong thing to use.
yeap -- it is wrong thing to use in 99.999% of merges... but in that
0.001 it might come useful (like "joining" two development paths
deciding to go with "the other" one from now on).
> A patch that includes documentation explaining what this is useful for
> would still be welcome.
> Thanks for the report. Hope that helps,
yes -- in many respects, thanks again
--
.-.
=------------------------------ /v\ ----------------------------=
Keep in touch // \\ (yoh@|www.)onerussian.com
Yaroslav Halchenko /( )\ ICQ#: 60653192
Linux User ^^-^^ [175555]
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
