Merge methods, part 1: intro

What does this MR do?

Begins the process of building up the content in https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/user/project/merge_requests/methods/ based on the (lovely!) graphs built by @mnichols1. The information this page needs is too complex to land in a single merge request, so I intend to proceed a subheading or two at a time.

An important note for the technical writing reviewer: this merge request represents the first couple of graphs. The intro includes a statement about how the graphs on this page involve a feature branch and a main branch, while not all graphs on this page follow this format just yet. If I try to do the entire page at once, it'll become nearly unreviewable.

The graph at https://github.com/todogroup/gh-issues/issues/61 FINALLY helped my brain understand what "semi-linear" meant. I nearly wept. I've wondered for years.

Mike's source image

A screencap of Mike's graphs, which are so gloriously simple that I can't NOT base my Mermaid work off of them:

Related issues

• Related to Follow-up, new merge methods page (#362111)
• Related to Add merge methods documentation page (!86309 - merged)
• Related to Improve documentation for merge options (#358599)
• Related to Introduce git merge --squash (#355613)
• Related to Allow user choice of merge options at the time ... (#355615)

Author's checklist

• Optional. Consider taking the GitLab Technical Writing Fundamentals course.
• Follow the:
  • Documentation process.
  • Documentation guidelines.
  • Style Guide.
• If you're adding or changing the main heading of the page (H1), ensure that the product tier badge is added.
• If you are a GitLab team member, request a review based on:
  • The documentation page's metadata.
  • The associated Technical Writer.

If you are a GitLab team member and only adding documentation, do not add any of the following labels:

• ~"frontend"
• ~"backend"
• ~"type::bug"
• ~"database"

These labels cause the MR to be added to code verification QA issues.

Reviewer's checklist

Documentation-related MRs should be reviewed by a Technical Writer for a non-blocking review, based on Documentation Guidelines and the Style Guide.

• If the content requires it, ensure the information is reviewed by a subject matter expert.
• Technical writer review items:
  • Ensure docs metadata is present and up-to-date.
  • Ensure the appropriate labels are added to this MR.
  • Ensure a release milestone is set.
  • If relevant to this MR, ensure content topic type principles are in use, including:
    • The headings should be something you'd do a Google search for. Instead of Default behavior, say something like Default behavior when you close an issue.
    • The headings (other than the page title) should be active. Instead of Configuring GDK, say something like Configure GDK.
    • Any task steps should be written as a numbered list.
    • If the content still needs to be edited for topic types, you can create a follow-up issue with the docs-technical-debt label.
• Review by assigned maintainer, who can always request/require the reviews above. Maintainer's review can occur before or after a technical writer review.