1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/git/git.git synced 2024-11-05 00:37:55 +01:00
git/Documentation/merge-options.txt

70 lines
1.9 KiB
Text
Raw Normal View History

-q::
--quiet::
Operate quietly.
-v::
--verbose::
Be verbose.
--stat::
Show a diffstat at the end of the merge. The diffstat is also
controlled by the configuration option merge.stat.
-n::
--no-stat::
Do not show a diffstat at the end of the merge.
--summary::
--no-summary::
Synonyms to --stat and --no-stat; these are deprecated and will be
removed in the future.
--log::
In addition to branch names, populate the log message with
one-line descriptions from the actual commits that are being
merged.
--no-log::
Do not list one-line descriptions from the actual commits being
merged.
--no-commit::
Perform the merge but pretend the merge failed and do
not autocommit, to give the user a chance to inspect and
further tweak the merge result before committing.
--commit::
Perform the merge and commit the result. This option can
be used to override --no-commit.
git-merge --squash Some people tend to do many little commits on a topic branch, recording all the trials and errors, and when the topic is reasonably cooked well, would want to record the net effect of the series as one commit on top of the mainline, removing the cruft from the history. The topic is then abandoned or forked off again from that point at the mainline. The barebone porcelainish that comes with core git tools does not officially support such operation, but you can fake it by using "git pull --no-merge" when such a topic branch is not a strict superset of the mainline, like this: git checkout mainline git pull --no-commit . that-topic-branch : fix conflicts if any rm -f .git/MERGE_HEAD git commit -a -m 'consolidated commit log message' git branch -f that-topic-branch ;# now fully merged This however does not work when the topic branch is a fast forward of the mainline, because normal "git pull" will never create a merge commit in such a case, and there is nothing special --no-commit could do to begin with. This patch introduces a new option, --squash, to support such a workflow officially in both fast-forward case and true merge case. The user-level operation would be the same in both cases: git checkout mainline git pull --squash . that-topic-branch : fix conflicts if any -- naturally, there would be : no conflict if fast forward. git commit -a -m 'consolidated commit log message' git branch -f that-topic-branch ;# now fully merged When the current branch is already up-to-date with respect to the other branch, there truly is nothing to do, so the new option does not have any effect. This was brought up in #git IRC channel recently. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2006-06-23 10:37:02 +02:00
--squash::
Produce the working tree and index state as if a real
merge happened (except for the merge information),
but do not actually make a commit or
git-merge --squash Some people tend to do many little commits on a topic branch, recording all the trials and errors, and when the topic is reasonably cooked well, would want to record the net effect of the series as one commit on top of the mainline, removing the cruft from the history. The topic is then abandoned or forked off again from that point at the mainline. The barebone porcelainish that comes with core git tools does not officially support such operation, but you can fake it by using "git pull --no-merge" when such a topic branch is not a strict superset of the mainline, like this: git checkout mainline git pull --no-commit . that-topic-branch : fix conflicts if any rm -f .git/MERGE_HEAD git commit -a -m 'consolidated commit log message' git branch -f that-topic-branch ;# now fully merged This however does not work when the topic branch is a fast forward of the mainline, because normal "git pull" will never create a merge commit in such a case, and there is nothing special --no-commit could do to begin with. This patch introduces a new option, --squash, to support such a workflow officially in both fast-forward case and true merge case. The user-level operation would be the same in both cases: git checkout mainline git pull --squash . that-topic-branch : fix conflicts if any -- naturally, there would be : no conflict if fast forward. git commit -a -m 'consolidated commit log message' git branch -f that-topic-branch ;# now fully merged When the current branch is already up-to-date with respect to the other branch, there truly is nothing to do, so the new option does not have any effect. This was brought up in #git IRC channel recently. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2006-06-23 10:37:02 +02:00
move the `HEAD`, nor record `$GIT_DIR/MERGE_HEAD` to
cause the next `git commit` command to create a merge
commit. This allows you to create a single commit on
top of the current branch whose effect is the same as
merging another branch (or more in case of an octopus).
--no-squash::
Perform the merge and commit the result. This option can
be used to override --squash.
--no-ff::
Generate a merge commit even if the merge resolved as a
fast-forward.
--ff::
Do not generate a merge commit if the merge resolved as
a fast-forward, only update the branch pointer. This is
the default behavior of git-merge.
-s <strategy>::
--strategy=<strategy>::
Use the given merge strategy; can be supplied more than
once to specify them in the order they should be tried.
If there is no `-s` option, a built-in list of strategies
is used instead ('git-merge-recursive' when merging a single
head, 'git-merge-octopus' otherwise).