The current docs for conflict markers start out by introducing Git
"diff3" conflict markers, and then discussing how Jujutsu's conflict
markers are different from Git's. I don't think this is the best way to
explain it, because it requires the reader to first understand Git's
conflict markers before they go on to learn Jujutsu's conflict markers.
Instead, I think it's better to explain the conflict markers from
scratch with a more detailed example so that we don't assume any
particular knowledge of Git.
This structure also works better with the new config option, since we
can talk about the default option first, and then go on to explain
alternatives later.
The Pijul maintainer has opinions that I don't understand about how we
mention Pijul (they consider the current mentions offensive as
"bashing Pijul"). Let's just remove the references so we don't have to
deal with it. I think the references to Darcs we already had in most
of these places are sufficient.
When importing `conflicts.md` into the Google repo, our internal tools
complained that it contained conflict markers. Similarly, if you ever
get an actual merge conflict in the file, the working-copy
snapshotting would parse our sample conflict markers here, forcing you
to work around it. Let's avoid that by indenting the conflict
markers. Hopefully readers will understand that the leading space is
not part of the markers.
I feel the original -------/+++++++ pair is slightly confusing because
each half can be a separator by itself. I don't know what character other
than '-'/'+' is preferred, but let's pick '%' (for "mod") per @martinvonz
suggestion.
We used to have documention about how conflicts are implemented, but I
removed that a long time ago when I rewrote the README to target users
rather than VCS hackers. Let's have a doc for the VCS hackers (and
curious users) as well, though.
