From: Petr Baudis Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 19:34:30 GMT Subject: Re: Expected Behavior? 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 said that... > On 11/10/05, Petr Baudis 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.