Re: [PATCH 0/2] Respecting core.autocrlf when showing objects

"J. Bruce Fields" [off-list ref] writes:

(Is there any advantage, then, to the :n:filename syntax to a user?
Is it useful in any cases when they couldn't use HEAD or MERGE_HEAD
instead?  If not I might be tempted to cut this bit entirely (or
postpone it till later.)

I am somewhat torn between the two.

This section is only about merge conflicts, so using "checkout HEAD path"
would be a good substitute.  The text flows better that way, because the
previous paragraph talks about HEAD and MERGE_HEAD.

When people run "am -3", however, they may wish that they learned how the
notation to name blob objects in the index (e.g. :2:path) can be used to
examine and resolve the conflict, as there is no HEAD/MERGE_HEAD in that
usage context.