git merge --no-commit with edits
git
Solution
Yes, it is still a merge. It doesn't matter whether you run `git merge <other-branch>`, or `git merge --no-commit <other-branch>`, the result will be a merge commit, that has two parents. The `--no-commit` option simply stops and lets you investigate that the merge went well before you commit the merge.
Problem
If I use ``` git merge --no-commit <other-branch> ``` and then make changes, such as removing files from the merge, is this still a real merge? I would like the branches to be related (with a merge), but I don't want all of the changes in the in the new branch. As a more concrete example, other-branch is a release branch from an older version. The current branch is the develop branch of the current product. We've made some changes for the release branch that should be moved to the develop branch. We've used cherry-picks in the past, but I feel like there may be an advantage to having git understand a relationship between the two branches. Is an edited merge still a merge?