"David Glasser" <glasser_at_davidglasser.net> writes:
> On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 7:49 AM, Justin Erenkrantz
>> As I said when it was suggested (and was promptly ignored), I must
>> protest that the UI changes to the interactive conflict resolution to
>> support #3048 make the entire system useless.
>>
>> First-off, case-sensitivity should simply not matter. The removal of
>> 'd' and 't' options are incredibly short-sighted - this is not an
>> acceptable situation and certainly not for 1.5 to be 'not implemented'
>> if that is the plan. I don't believe the problem that was raised
>> (that the diff is not as optimal as it could be) is really a
>> legitimate problem. I think it's actually more useful to have the 'd'
>> and 't' be as they were - with (at best) new options to show a reduced
>> merge. I find it way more useful to show me what changed overall
>> since my update (ie base rev) *and* where the conflicts are - because
>> without what merged 'cleanly', it's not easy to understand the
>> conflicts! So, even if/when 'd' and 't' are implemented as described
>> in #3048, the default options are going to be not that helpful because
>> we're going to throw away the remaining merge information that *led*
>> to the conflict and we'll just get only part of what changed. This is
>> not enough information to be useful to me as a developer when I'm
>> evaluating the change.
>
> I think this ends up being a matter of opinion. I've certainly
> already found on a regular basis that when a small number of conflicts
> turn up during a huge merge, the diff options are pretty worthless to
> me.
All addressed in r29648, and I'll nominate it for backport now.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_subversion.tigris.org
Received on 2008-03-01 02:36:49 CET