[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: <<< conflict markers

From: Tom Lord
Subject: Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: <<< conflict markers
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2004 15:01:20 -0700 (PDT)

    > From: Aaron Bentley <address@hidden>

    > [mixed tag/commit versions vs. update]

I'll be curt because I _am_ still in the middle of the move (projected
to be essentially done by the last week of april! :-).   If I blow off
something critical, please re-raise the topic in 2 weeks.

I understand you to be saying that `update' should better handle mixed
versions _or_ mixed versions should be prohibited.

Prohibiting mixed versions is not an option.  They are quite useful.
To choose an extreme example, in a version that exists only to be used
with `get', they are clearly handy.

Better handling mixed versions in update is, afaict, an ill-defined
problem.  What "better" means depends on how you are using the mixed
version.   There is no single correct answer.   So, I just want to
pick, from among the possible answers that give the right result in a
non-mixed version, one that is simple to explain, understand, and
implement efficiently.

There is a bogosity I'm surprised you haven't brought up.   Currently,
the result produced by `update' _for_a_mixed_version_ is
non-deterministic.   It depends on the state of your revision
libraries.    _Perhaps_ that should be fixed.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]