On 6/7/07, Mark Phippard <markphip@gmail.com> wrote:
> I was with you until the last part. I think the "built-in" simple
> acceptance callbacks shiould be more intelligent than operating on the
> entire file. I think they ought to still merge the non-conflicting
> hunks and only use this acceptance hint on the hunks that are in
> conflict.
I agree, I was imagining that the non-conflicting hunks still get
merged before the callback is ever invoked. In other words: do our
existing 3-way merge exactly as we do today. If the merge results in
a conflicted file (i.e. some hunks aren't mergeable), *then* we check
for a callback to invoke. We pass filehandles to the callback for the
fulltexts, as well as a handle to the 'mostly merged' working file.
The only thing I don't understand is what you mean by using a 'hint'
on the conflicting chunks. In the --accept callback implementation,
you imagine some value meaning "use my file", anothehr value that
means "use their file", and a third value that means "use the
mostly-merged working file, and favor conflicting hunks in one
direction?"
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Fri Jun 8 04:45:09 2007