Re: Expected Behavior?
- From
Petr Baudis <pasky@suse.cz>
- Date
- Nov 10, 2005, 19:34 UTC
- Message-ID
- <20051110193430.GU30496@pasky.or.cz>
- In-Reply-To
- <46a038f90511091847t70567e50o2303f1dc7ada2464@mail.gmail.com>
Dear diary, on Thu, Nov 10, 2005 at 03:47:38AM CET, I got a letter where Martin Langhoff <martin.langhoff@gmail.com> said that...
Show 9 quoted lines
> On 11/10/05, Petr Baudis <pasky@suse.cz> wrote: > > Yes. My longer plan is to use the strategy resolvers as well, but my > > TODO list is big... And I don't perceive this as a critical thing (the > > standard strategy seems to work well enough), although I would like to > > see this before 1.0. > > Fair enough. If you can outline how the interaction between cg-merge > and cg-commit are expected to work, I'll try and find some time for > that.
Well, basically like right now ;-).
Merging is a two-stage process, where the two stages are isolated and the latter does not interfere with the former. The former one is doing the actual content merge, and that's what cg-merge does. The latter one is recording the merge in history, and that's what cg-commit does.
-- Petr "Pasky" Baudis Stuff: http://pasky.or.cz/ VI has two modes: the one in which it beeps and the one in which it doesn't.