On Sat, Apr 18, 2020 at 06:21:31AM -0600, Todd C. Miller wrote:
> On Sat, 18 Apr 2020 14:09:30 +0200, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> 
> >  - skip conflicted files during updates
> >
> > This is what Subversion does as well. Compared to the previous approach
> > the main downside is that the work tree is left in a partially updated
> > state, rather than left entirely in its previous state. And the user may
> > not notice the problem until much later, because people rarely scroll back
> > up to check the progress output for files which were skipped.
> > However, if this happens we were already in a state where our code would
> > not even compile, and the user was careless and updated anyway.
> > And we still have an advantage over the implementation in got 0.33 because
> > losing local changes without user intervention has become very unlikely.
> 
> This approach makes the most sense to me.  Would it be possible to
> output the list of conflicted files at the end of the update so the
> user is more likely to notice them?

Of course. Though such a list could potentially grow very long, too.

In Subversion the final lines contain a report on the number of conflicted
and skipped files found during an update. And this report is omitted if no
such issues were encountered. Perhaps that is better?