Re: Distinguishing trivial and non-trivial merge commits

On May  2, Jonathan Nieder wrote:

Maybe --name-only or --name-status can help.

Note that most conflicts will not show up here: if the merge result
matches either parent, then git diff --cc and friends will not
consider it interesting at all.

Isn't that a good definition of a trivial commit?  I'm not talking
about the whole commit -- just any file that is not identical to one
of its parents.

A command to list conflicts and their resolutions would be expensive
but valuable, I think.  A naïve implementation would involve redoing
the merge.
[...]
A “merge diffstat” sounds like an interesting idea, but the detailed
semantics are not obvious to me (maybe separate counts for
nontrivial added and removed lines from each parent?).

OK, thanks for clarifying that.  For my purpose, I basically just want
to know whether there was manual tweaking involved in the merge.  (For
my thing I don't even need to see those changes, since I show the
overall push diff only.)  What I ended up doing is pretty bad:

  git show --pretty=short --name-only "$r" | grep -q '^Merge: '
    --> test if it's a merge commit

  git show --pretty=format:"" --name-only "$r" | grep -q "."
    --> test if it's trivial

  git show --pretty=format:"" "$r" | diffstat -p1
    --> get the diffstated output

(My script generally "compensates" for git being fast by running a ton
of them for each email...)

-- 
          ((lambda (x) (x x)) (lambda (x) (x x)))          Eli Barzilay:
                    http://barzilay.org/                   Maze is Life!