Re: [PATCH v2] merge-file: honor merge.conflictStyle outside of a repository

Yannik Tausch [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

Junio C Hamano [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

Wouldn't it suffice to unconditionally execute the body of the if
(startup_info->have_repository) block to pass "repo" we obtained
from the caller to repo_config() instead of the_repository?  The
caller of this function passes us either the_repository or NULL and
repo_config() does the very-early thing when passed NULL as the
repo, signalling that we are outside a repository.

Jup, looks like I missed that. Implemented your suggestion!
...
Done!

Here is the new patch:

From 9fa437c70bfd328cfdfe9cfca982b49b70ad033f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Yannik Tausch <redacted>
Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2026 21:09:52 +0100
Subject: [PATCH v2] merge-file: honor merge.conflictStyle outside of a
 repository

Please do not send patches this way.  Giving responses to review
comments is very good and strongly encouraged, but stop the response
message with "a new version of the patch coming!" and have a separate
message for the patch itself.

It sometimes is done to interject a sample patch in the middle of a
discussion, but then the convention is

	... continuation of an existing discussion ...

	So, how about doing things this way?

	--- >8 ---
	Subject: the title of the patch

	The proposed log message for the commit comes here

	Signed-off-by: you
	---

	... notes, diffstat, diff ...

i.e., use a scissors line to tell the receiving end that the rest of
the message is a patch message, and override the Subject: with an
in-body header.  Omit the (From <object-name> Mon Sep 17 2001)
"magic" line, "From:" and "Date:".  The last two can be taken from
the e-mail message anyway.