Git merge disappointment

[Chanoch (Ken) Bloom]

On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 12:01:16PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> Aristotle Pagaltzis wrote:
> > It’s really the diff algorithm that’s getting fouled up.
> 
> > The solution is to use a better common marker than empty lines,
> 
> Patience diff is probably a better solution. While git diff supports it,
> I don't know how to make it be used for a merge.

Thanks, I was going to suggest something along those lines, but I
didn't remember the name of patience diff, and none of my googling
found it either, so I wound up not saying anything about fact that it
was probably choking on blank lines.

The GIT guys considered patience merges, but decided against it
because it didn't (in the general case) produce cleaner merges. It
appears to be only a 1 line patch to add the feature to git (requiring
more changes depending how you want to control its use), and might be
a great help in your specific case.

http://git.661346.n2.nabble.com/libxdiff-and-patience-diff-td1452272i40.html

--Ken

-- 
Chanoch (Ken) Bloom. PhD candidate. Linguistic Cognition Laboratory.
Department of Computer Science. Illinois Institute of Technology.
http://www.iit.edu/~kbloom1/