Following on from GitHub subtree merge requests, I've been pondering whether a merge conflict that arises during a(n automated) git subtree pull could easily be "stored" somewhere in order that it can later be "resumed" on a different (manual) copy of the repo.
From git stash during a merge conflict, I gather that a merge conflict can (with a little tweaking) be stashed and resumed in the same repo; and from How can I share a git stash?, I gather that a stash can be shared with a remote repo as a regular commit... but the former requires git stash pop's --index flag in order to restore an index state that differs from that of the working set, whereas the latter would entail a git checkout of the remote stash's ref that results in an index that is aligned with the working set. I'm not even sure whether pushing a stash as a regular ref would retain such distinct information for the two data structures?
Is there any way that merge conflict resolution can be resumed in another/remote copy of the repo?
