Re: Interactively postpone all remaining conflicts?
On Tue, 06 Nov 2007, Karl Fogel wrote:
> Daniel Rall <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> > Until we can more gracefully support the case where a merge conflict
> > occurs before the final pass of a multi-pass 'merge' operation, I
> > hesitate to offer this feature for 'merge'. And while it might be
> > convenient now if we could determine that a merge required only a
> > single pass (using a callback from the cmdline-client into
> > libsvn_client), this would result in a UI inconsistency.
> Given this, I agree -- let's not try for it in 1.5. If people really
> want it, we'll hear about it, and maybe we'll feel differently about
> automatic continuation in multi-pass merges even over conflicts by
> then. (Don't ask me why, we just might.)
Fine with me. Should an issue be filed so that it's not forgotten?
Received on Thu Nov 8 00:29:03 2007
- application/pgp-signature attachment: stored
This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev