Sublime Forum

Sublime merge editor path doesn't work? Also there's no diff between branches


Setting the editor path doesn’t trigger the editor when i commit a message.

Is it possible to prepend or append messages through sublime merge?

Why is it not possible to diff between branches?

How is this paid software vs source tree ???

1 Like

Editor_path not working correctly

The editor you specify in editor_path is used when you select Open in Editor from the context menu (or when you press the bound key) in order to open the file you’re currently diffing/looking at for editing. When this is set to nothing (the default), Merge tries to find Sublime Text and uses that instead.

The editor isn’t used to edit commit messages for commits though, if that’s what you were expecting. There is a dedicated pane/view for that, above the area where you stage files for commit.

I’m not entirely sure what you mean by this; are you referring to modifying commit messages somehow? If so, while you’re viewing a commit, the More Actions menu (three dots in the top right of the window) has an option for Edit Commit > Edit Commit Message for this purpose.

There is (at least currently) no facility for a template git commit message.

If you select two commits from the commit graph, the view on the right switches to a diff between the contents of those two commits, allowing you to see what changed between the two of them. This can be any two arbitrary commits or the commits relating to two branches.

1 Like


I got this working for Mac Vim:

  • editor_path: /usr/local/bin/mvim (which is the output of which mvim)
  • editor_argument_format: +${line} {file}

Works great now :slight_smile:

1 Like


i think i had way too high expectations for sublime merge. For the price I was expecting a source tree / git kraken contender, especially since I paid for the sublime 3 license.

The preferences file doesn’t have comments, and the default prefs aren’t available for comparison. Git templates are unavailable. I wasted way too much time trying to figure this software out.

This is absurd when there’s a lot of parallel branches (this is the common case when there are many people working on the same repo in parallel) and I have to manually search for the commit hash to compare. Source tree at least allows you to diff against the branch you’ve selected. In fact the command palette doesn’t even have the diff command.

Again, my misgivings were due to sublime merge being technically paid software, while not providing at least feature parity with cost-free software, is closed source, and also has zero documentation.



You judgement is a bit unfair. Just answer the question: How old is Git Kraken vs. How old is Sublime Merge?

Sublime Merge is a very young product, which just started to be published a few days ago. I’d guess its development time started with the last release of Sublime Text. So the result is already quite good with half a year of work.

I guess any valuable critics and ideas are used to further improve SM and create the features the majority needs. But in order to do that, feedback is required as everybody has different workflows and expectations.

Sure, SM is not feature complete, but have a look at Fork for Windows. It exists way longer, but is far behind SM.



If you select two commits from the commit graph, the view on the right switches to a diff between the contents of those two commits, allowing you to see what changed between the two of them. This can be any two arbitrary commits or the commits relating to two branches.

If the branches are not merged into the same branch (the same timeline or what you call it), I do not see how this is possible.
Once you select a new branch, the old selection is lost.

Did I miss something obvious?




If you trace far enough back through the commit graph everything has to join up at some point because everything has to descend from the very first commit that was made. So whether or not two commits are on the same branch or merged together, as long as they’re in the same repository they’re somehow related through a common ancestor.

You can select multiple commits in the commit graph similarly to how you would select multiple items in other lists, using Ctrl+Click to add or remove single items and Shift+Click to select items in a range.

Just for clarity, here’s a video, which might help clear things up a bit as far as what I meant when I said the above.



yeah sure but … ouw … don’t let that be the final answer please :smile:

I’m actually pretty sure you can have more than one root so you can have two unrelated roots that merge at some point, so they both have a divergent history with no common ancestor actually.



Well indeed I have a vague recollection of some sort of git trickery that can be used to create a commit with no parent (or maybe multiple parents?) but offhand I don’t know how common such a thing would be in practice.

I should point out that I’m by no means a git guru. :slight_smile:



The easiest way to create an empty branch is to git-init a new folder, make a commit, configure remotes and then push that. I use this for CD of gh-pages.



I have said that my judgement is mainly due to SM being paid software while not providing features that are common to other cost free alternatives which people rely on. There’s nothing unfair of expecting paid software to be better than something that doesn’t cost a dollar. I’ll gladly pay if it’s better, but so far it lacks the features.

If it was released as a beta, and then they gather opinions and they released a proper version I’m fine with it. It means they at least tried to get public opinion before making the final version