Re: [RFC] Property conflicts should save old/theirs/mine versions

Karl Fogel wrote:
> Stefan Sperling <stsp_at_elego.de> writes:
>> So Julian's approach to storing property conflicts data in the auth
>> is consistent with what we have already done on the tree conflicts
>> branch.
>>
>> While maintaining consistency between the way text conflicts and
>> other types of conflicts are handled is certainly desirable, I don't
>> think it's viable. The way we currently deal with text conflicts is fine.
>> But it is also much simpler than how we want to deal with tree and property
>> conflicts. And the way our current trunk code is dealing with either
>> of those is, well, suboptimal.
>
> *nod* Okay, that all sounds reasonable to me. (Assuming you mean
> "admin area" where you write "auth area").

Man, I hope so. If "auth area" was really what was intended, I'll have to
hit the local sporting goods shop to purchase enough red flags to wave.

-- 
C. Michael Pilato <cmpilato_at_collab.net>
CollabNet   <>   www.collab.net   <>   Distributed Development On Demand