Re: Expected Behavior?
- From
Martin Langhoff <martin.langhoff@gmail.com>
- Date
- Nov 10, 2005, 02:47 UTC
- Message-ID
- <46a038f90511091847t70567e50o2303f1dc7ada2464@mail.gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <20051109234925.GL30496@pasky.or.cz>
On 11/10/05, Petr Baudis <pasky@suse.cz> wrote:
> But that's something different that I'm talking about. :-)
Ack! Sorry about that!
> 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.
Show 7 quoted lines
> > Right now I am seeing some slightly abnormal things (*) in how some > > our our merges are going, so I' ll have to roll up my sleeves at some > > point and try and figure out what's going on. And as I look into > > cg-merge and cg-Xmergefile, not many eyes have been through it... > > At least this is the one area of Cogito that has at least a bit > reasonable automated testing suite. ;-)
The good news is that git-merge is doing almost the same. Posted separately...
martin