Date: Mon, 21 May 2012 02:16:42 +0400 From: Aleksey Cherepanov <aleksey.4erepanov@...il.com> To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: file synchronization backend for MJohn On Sun, May 20, 2012 at 11:02:44PM +0200, Frank Dittrich wrote: > On 05/20/2012 10:41 PM, Simon Marechal wrote: > > On 05/20/2012 10:14 PM, Aleksey Cherepanov wrote: > >> Looking deeply in git I found that the conflict could be easily fixed: > >> git inserts lines '<<<<<<< HEAD', '=======' and '>>>>>>> <commit_id>' > >> into file, these lines could be easily replaced by one sed call, also > >> git inserts new lines from file that are ok as is. Though I think it > >> is rather a hack but it could work and it may be hard to do it better. > >> So I will try to use it first. > > > > Automatically resolving conflicts is exactly something you should not > > do. Why not do it how it should be done ? When you can't push because > > somebody else did just before you did, you can : > > - force push, destroying everything that was pushed by others and just > > be obnoxious, or > > - pull, hope for an automatic resolution and push the merge, or > > - fetch, rebase your patch and push. > > > > I like the git approach because you can explain the reason of every > > change in the commit log and link every change to someone. It helps a > > lot for after action report. > > Supporting "after action" reports is a definite plus. We could use git only on the server just to make history (not using it for file transfers). Regards, Aleksey Cherepanov
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.