[PATCH] merge: improve conflict markers by pointing to introrev

[Danek Duvall]

Pierre-Yves David wrote:

> On 03/09/2016 02:36 PM, Simon Farnsworth wrote:
>
> >My thought is that we should change this, so a default set of commit markers look like:
> ><<<<<<< local: merging 7c459574949d tag bookmark branch - last change 4dbc2cd1399a
> >=======
> >>>>>>>>other: merging 6de9c4bc3d38 tag bookmark branch - last change 00025129f739
> >
> >
> >The idea is that by only giving you locations, and not details, you
> >won't feel that the conflict marker is telling you about the commit that
> >caused the conflict, but instead is giving you locations to help you
> >find out why there's a conflict here.
> >
> >Thoughts?
> 
> - I've mixed feeling about dropping the description is often more useful
> than hash, especially during rebase because you can know what changeset you
> are merging in this case. But dropping it free a lot of space

I would really be sorry to not have the description.  I'm not usually
working in a situation where the tag or branch information would be useful,
and we don't use bookmarks, and I haven't memorized all the changeset IDs,
but the descriptions would usually give me a pretty good idea of what part
of the tree that changeset is from.  The author of that changeset might be
nice, too, though in my case it'll usually not be completely
distinguishing.

As long as it's all configurable, though, I'm okay with configuring it to
my own preferences.

Danek