feat(mergiraf solve): make `--keep-backup` conflict with `--stdout` #291

Merged

ada4a merged 2 commits from ada4a/mergiraf:cli_conflict_stdout_keep_backup into main

2025-03-26 23:49:10 +01:00

ada4a commented

2025-03-26 20:01:13 +01:00

Owner

After all, if we don't overwrite the original file, there's no reason to
also create a backup of it

Fixes #264

Depends on #290

After all, if we don't overwrite the original file, there's no reason to also create a backup of it Fixes #264 Depends on #290

ada4a added 2 commits

2025-03-26 20:01:17 +01:00

feat(mergiraf solve): rename --keep to --stdout

/ test (pull_request) Successful in 59s

Details

6892d35f7d

Fixes #263

feat(mergiraf solve): make --keep-backup conflict with --stdout

/ test (pull_request) Successful in 57s

Details

e78a80123d

After all, if we don't overwrite the original file, there's no reason to
also create a backup of it

Fixes #264

Depends on #290

ada4a commented

2025-03-26 20:06:23 +01:00

Author

Owner

After all, if we don't overwrite the original file, there's no reason to
also create a backup of it

Normally, I don't add a description to (what will become) the commit message of PRs, with the idea that one can always open the corresponding issue for more context. But keeping the context inside the Git repo has its own merits -- moving in-forge information such as issues/PRs is not always trivial. Therefore I think it can make sense to provide a short description at least

> After all, if we don't overwrite the original file, there's no reason to also create a backup of it Normally, I don't add a description to (what will become) the commit message of PRs, with the idea that one can always open the corresponding issue for more context. But keeping the context inside the Git repo has its own merits -- moving in-forge information such as issues/PRs is not always trivial. Therefore I think it can make sense to provide a short description at least